Yikes! This is horrible
- Thread starter CAJUNEER_rivals
- Start date
His time is very limited (and that shouldn't be construed as a threat from me). Actions like this will get him killed. He's already had several scuffles since killing Trayvon.
He the person wasn't defended. The situation was defended. You don't convict someone for being an idiot. What I saw was people defending the action, not standing up for him as the individual.
He certainly has had his problems. I'm sure he needs the money. Sad thing to do.
They were complying with the law on the books. But I was really surprised DOJ didn't overrule and hang his *** on civil rights law. Looked like the perfect pigeon.
DOJ is pretty limited on what they can with a private citizen in case like his. Had he been a public official there would have been a better chance, but even then it would be unlikely.
Maye. They assumed the one in SC yesterday. It was commonplace in the South after 1963. Are you saying they can't or don't now?
Exactly. And him being an *** doesn't give anyone the right to deny me my rights.
The ones they picked up in the past usually involved public officials (cops) or those engaged in a conspiracy to deny rights (Klan).
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36281438
In an online posting to announce the auction, Mr Zimmerman said that he would use the profits to "fight" the Black Lives Matter movement and oppose Democrat Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign.
In an online posting to announce the auction, Mr Zimmerman said that he would use the profits to "fight" the Black Lives Matter movement and oppose Democrat Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign.
His right to shoot a kid who whipped his *** for chasing said kid around. That thing involving fat paranoid white guys having the right to shoot underage black kids for hurting their pride. There's a name for it but it escapes me. At least the kid had self-defense going for him.
hard to imagine someone actually defending him for shooting a kid who whipped his ***. did someone really do that?
Well I guess if that your understanding of the case, then I can see why you came to the conclusions you did as incorrect as your understanding may be.
Oh and way to stereotype, it's ok though, we all remember that he was a "white hispanic" or whatever the fvcking term was. The media sold racism and there were a whole gang of rubes who bought in.
It is usually the same rubes who always fall for what the media sells. Then they mock fox news and don't see the irony.
They know the facts of the case and refuse to be confused by witness, and law on the books is probably not the way it should be. Damn, it would be great to act like SCOTUS in these local matters and base decision on "the way it should be and not necessarily the way it is written". Reinforces those who see the Constitution as a "living breathing thing".