Oh my god, Muir actually wants to continue with this story.

Even more oh my god, I was right. Yes, we learn after the fact that the black guys had juvie records and drug paraphenalia, so the Muir-expy was perfectly justified shooting first! Just like how George Zimmerman was justified in shooting Trayvon Martin, because Martin smoked pot once.

I’ll repeat what I said this morning: even when Muir is writing his own story and can arrange the facts in whatever way he wants, he still comes up with an unintelligible, basically racist story that (shockingly) does not put a new spin on the Trayvon Martin shooting that has made me (or, I guess, anyone else) reassess the story.

And why is Muir suddenly on that story again? The rest of the country has moved on from it (take that however you will), so why does he want to bring it up again? Why is he so set on making George Zimmerman out to be this perfect and holy victim? Has Muir expressed a single shred of sympathy for Martin, the person who was actually killed?? Has he said anything along the lines of ‘Of course Zimmerman had a right to defend himself, but it’s a tragedy that it turned out to be fatal.’? A young man was killed and Muir is trying to make Zimmerman out to be a fucking saint who didn’t do a damn thing wrong. Starkest black and white view possible.

And why does he have to make it about Obama now? Obama only ever expressed a view on the shooting when asked about it by the press. He didn’t take it up as his personal crusade (nevermind Muir’s conspiracy-addled brain thinking the White House dictates what and how the media reports).

But getting back to this comic: what we have is first we see some black guys, nothing to indicate they’re wicked except *gasp!* they’re wearing hoodies and bandanas. Then the white guy accidentally knocks out two of the black guys, and we’re not shown that the black guys were about to do anything untoward. We don’t see them at all, in fact. We never see them, outside of the first strip. So as far as we know it’s clutzy sitcom antics. Then, on day four (I had skipped day two), we finally see the black guys do something ‘villainous,’ but I have to include quotations because I don’t think it’s entirely unexpected that this guy is drawing a gun after seeing someone beat his two… Roosevelts (Urban Dictionary was no help there). He gets shots, apparently by Liberal Stereotype Woman pulling a gun out of… somewhere and firing like every stereotypical woman in an action movie who has never held a gun before (eyes closed, head turned, arms held straight out). Cue revelation that the third black guy was shot by the Muir-expy. Then we get all the justification for this AFTER THE FACT!

I say this again, what we see in the first three strips make the third guy’s decision to pull a gun not reasonable (not at all), but neither unexpected. If you assault someone (or their friends) expect the other person to resist you. As far as we see, Lumber Guy started this.

But Muir couldn’t tell that story, a story about unintended assault and quickly rising tempers escalating to the point that people are danger. No. He had to make the black guys unequivocal villains. They had uzis. They had drug paraphenalia. They had juvenile records (and how did that fact come to light so fast? When is the Obama segment of this cartoon taking place in relation to everything else? Days later? A week?). The Muir-expy was justified in shooting first because of facts brought to light after the incident took place. That’s the same strategy Muir et al have used in trying to clear Zimmerman of any wrongdoing. “Look at this Facebook photo of Trayvon Martin doing some gangsta pose! Zimmerman clearly had no choice but to open fire!”

This story and the comments on Zimmerman in this strip don’t make me want to reconsider my views on the Trayvon Martin shooting. They make me think of Laser Baby. Of how the Muir-expy should have gathered some basic information beforehand, before opening fire. Zimmerman can at least make a claim to self-defense, but there is the question of whether he had stalked/harassed Martin and thus angered him, and therefore to what extent he instigated the entire matter based on nothing more than Trayon ‘looking suspicious.’

But the Muir-expy? He saw two white people and three black guys (two unconscious) and he opened fire. It’s only because this story is fiction, is being manipulated to fit the author’s viewpoint, that there’s the ‘resolution’ (if you want to call it that) in the revelation that the black guys were criminals and had ill intentions.

My reaction, though, is to ask “What if they hadn’t been criminals?” What if someone saw some suspicious black men and opened fire, without provocation, and it turns out they were innocent victims? I find that far, far more likely than “The would-be muggers (armed with uzis) were knocked out before they could do anything and then the would-be victims were saved by a vigilante and oh by the way the muggers had incriminating evidence on them so everything’s fine.” How fucking convoluted is that?

Oh, and I forgot “They attacked you because you were white.” Or maybe because they happened to be the ones passing by. What’s the rationale that we’re supposed to believe the would-be muggers were racist, other than Muir having his character say so? Why should we accept they wouldn’t have attacked a black couple if given the same opportunity? Muir is making assertions about character motivation and plot that he doesn’t actually back up. That’s just piss-poor writing.

Hell, it’s not just piss-poor. It’s shitty. It’s beyond shitty. Ladies and gentlemen, this may be the 2nd Worst Storyline in Webcomic History.