100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
|
|
|
Well, where are all the complaints that they are racists? You know what I think is racist? When an African American posts he or she is proud to be black. If I posted I were proud to be white, I'd be called a racist or white-supremist. We can't help what color our skin is. I'd rather be saying I am proud to be a Christian or a good mother or anti-violent or anti-racist!! Racism comes in all shades and...races. Sad, sad shame that people are still so against each other over color and race. I like to detest people on an individual basis, regarless of skin color or race. 
I also think that is racist. I think there are different levels of racist and that 90 percent of americans are at one of those levels. I think its not so BLATANTLY racist though as other levels of racism to be proud of the accomplishments of those who come directly from you or before you. As long as one does not feel that that particular group is therefore BETTER Than other groups. Its one thing to be proud, its another to feel superior. I disagree. When I think racism I think hatred for another race. In this day in age I find it hard to believe that is prominent. I would have to say people confuse being prejudice to being racist. Prejudice is having a certain judgement toward a person because of religion, sexulal orientation, race, etc. when I think 'racism' in the simplest of explanations I break down the word Race c : a category of humankind that shares certain distinctive physical traits ism: distinctive doctrine, cause, or theory I think environment and media impression upon us from a young age certain 'stereotypes' which causes us to believe certain traits within certain groups I think ninety percent of americans certainly have some 'custom made' ideas about certain races and groups, even if they are subconsciously applied,,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Wed 03/28/12 07:34 PM
|
|
its interesting
the shirt looks awfully clean for someone that shot someone at close range while the person was 'pummeling' them,,,,seems like some stains would be there,,, but I guess the jacket happens to cover them, or maybe they took them as evidence and let him change? He also seems VERY clean in general, not so out of shape at all, so I will imagine some medical professionals took care of him prior and therefore should present some documentation of the evidence of a 'pummeling',,, the back of his head looks incredible to have taken such a pummeling too,,, and he seems to have composed himself from all that crying during this random minute and a half,,, ,,,interesting |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I wonder if Black people know that when you call a white person a "Cracker" it actually insults themselves? The term "Cracker" comes from the old days when white people owned slaves and would "Crack" the whip to get them to work. So by calling me a Cracker you are assuming I'm your slavemaster! I know it and I agree. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, where are all the complaints that they are racists? You know what I think is racist? When an African American posts he or she is proud to be black. If I posted I were proud to be white, I'd be called a racist or white-supremist. We can't help what color our skin is. I'd rather be saying I am proud to be a Christian or a good mother or anti-violent or anti-racist!! Racism comes in all shades and...races. Sad, sad shame that people are still so against each other over color and race. I like to detest people on an individual basis, regarless of skin color or race.
I also think that is racist. I think there are different levels of racist and that 90 percent of americans are at one of those levels. I think its not so BLATANTLY racist though as other levels of racism to be proud of the accomplishments of those who come directly from you or before you. As long as one does not feel that that particular group is therefore BETTER Than other groups. Its one thing to be proud, its another to feel superior. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Double murderer: Teenager guilty of killing two lost Brits who strayed into 'wrong' area on holiday Brits James Kouzaris and James Cooper were gunned down after they drunkenly walked into a public housing estate in Sarasota An American teenager was found guilty tonight of shooting dead two British friends on holiday in Florida. Shawn Tyson, 17, murdered the James Cooper, 24, and James Kouzaris, 25, who were drunk and lost in a rundown housing estate in Sarasota, Florida. Tennis coach Mr Kouzaris, from Northampton, and town planner Mr Cooper, from Hampton Lucy near Warwick, walked into The Court in the early hours of 16 April last year. They were confronted by Tyson, who tried to rob them, then when they had no money, told them: “Well since you ain’t got no money, I got something for your ***.” The men pleaded to go home, saying they were drunk, but the teenager, then 16, shot first one of them, then the other. When they were found, both still had their wallets and cash. Tyson boasted to friend Latrece Washington that one of the victims was “crying for his life”, and he had shot him and “emptied the clip on him”. Jermaine Bane said a series of calls were made around the time of the shots and in one, heard Tyson mention two “crackers”, or white men, walking in the area. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/florida-shootings-shawn-tyson-convicted-773305 senseless violence in which there was a conviction to give the deceased some justice,,,, I also dont know who Jermaine Bane is or, if there actually is a tape of a call prior to the event in which the caller referred to them as 'white', than it was an injustice not to prosecute for a hate crime unless no such tape exists and they were prosected AND CONVICTED,, justly, for murder,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting
I also cant wait for some 'truth' to come out , be addressed, so we can all move forward from here,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
great, going backwards to wild west,,,,
gonna be interesting,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So lets just say Travon punched him in the face for that matter. So it is OK for a person to murder someone after taking a punch. Sounds like a fake tough guy to me. It is ok to confront a person and not expect him to fight back. But when he does it is ok to kill him. One fist is equal to a bullet. Bunch of BS. Actually I would guess most of the people with guns have no idea how to defend themselves without a deadly weapon. As a general rule, any death caused by injuries received in a fight, argument, quarrel, assault, or commission of a crime is classified as Murder and Nonnegligent Manslaughter a fight, by itself, is not grounds to justify a shooting,,, what I have been trying to get across, it is a case by case basis by the UCR code, for instance if someone robs a place with a GUN and is shot with a GUN, it is justifiable if someone gets in a fight at a card game and the first man attacks the second with a broken bottle and the second man shoots the first , it is NOT JUSTIFIABLE |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think most americans could be offered ten million dollars, but if your conditions were they could not LEAVE a little room
except to go to a dangerous yard and exercise ,,you couldnt pay most americans to give up all their 'freedom' |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the media can really twist things and run with hearsay and 'he said/she said' stuff
this case proves it I just hope the parents (and now most likely the world) will be able to get the FACTS presented in a court where the criteria for integrity and FACTUAL validity are a bit higher than they are in the media... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think the crime should be ELEVATED.
If someone is stalking, there should be the original TRO and when the TRO is violated, with premeditation (Im not talking about ending up at the same store where you both actually ARE shopping) the offense should be elevated I dont want to be in a situation (its on my mind alot lately, so its going to keep coming up in my logic,,,) where I am scared by someone following me at night even IF I try to go a different direction and put distance between us and I end up dead after fighting to try to SAVE my life and leaving bruises on my intimidator/aggressor at least, if I Have had a TRO on that person at any time, they will have less justification in the eyes of the law,,, being followed around can be very intimidating,,,and make one feel very threatened depending upon the environment,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NRA stats are garbage so don't believe em Harmony stats are often a grey area for me dragonness as a victim myself, I have seen the actual STATS at fbi cites actually listing (in the same time frame of years my attack took place) that there were ZERO assaults on black women by white men,,,, so , yeah, we have to be careful with 'stats' too numbers can be slanted to whatever direction an intelligent person wishes,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
so the claim that guns are 'saving more lives' does not follow just because crimes are being stopped,,, Are you really going to argue that rape, mugging, car jacking, robbery, burglary could never end in murder? no, Im not arguing that it 'could never' Im arguing that stopping one doesnt PRESUME that it 'would have' and thus cant be broadly assumed to have saved a life,,,, Something like 16% of all violent crimes result in a murder. So it's reasonable to assume that 16% of violent crimes stopped by the use of guns would have resulted in the murder of the victim. That's not presumption, it's deduction. its a bad deduction A. 16 percent of all violent crimes result in murder B. 16 percent of violent crimes stopped by guns would have ended in murder ,,,,This presumes the group in A is the SAME Group in B,,,that they are the exact same 16 percent,,,which is unlikely unless ALL The violent crimes had been stopped by guns, making the statements conclusive,,, that would be the same as saying this 15 percent of the population is black therefore 15 percent of the criminal population is black,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
great actress,, should be interesting I will grant that the woman is a good actress. However this would be the same as having Benedict Arnold play the part of George Washington. It is sickening. The woman should have been treated the way Mr. Arnold was, stripped of citizenship had banished to wander the world. Im not quite getting how Nancy Reagan is comparatible to George Washington,,, she was a presidents wife,, what else was so special about her? She did a guest appearance on Different Strokes. 
just seems like people are reacting as if they asked Jane to play mother theresa or something she is an actress, she portrays CHARACTERS, NR was definitely a cHARACTER,,,,,,so whats so strange about the match? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posing for pictures with the North and going on a propaganda tour on one of their weapons is providing aid and comfort to the enemy. so traveling someplace and taking pictures someplace is the same as 'aiding and comforting' thats oddly non 'free', in such a free country,,,, I kind of thought it more reasonable that , in context, the constitution was referring to aiding and comforting WITHIN The scope of trying to overthrow a government,,,, I didnt know they meant being present and taking pictures,,,thats interesting though,,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
so the claim that guns are 'saving more lives' does not follow just because crimes are being stopped,,, Are you really going to argue that rape, mugging, car jacking, robbery, burglary could never end in murder? no, Im not arguing that it 'could never' Im arguing that stopping one doesnt PRESUME that it 'would have' and thus cant be broadly assumed to have saved a life,,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
The Stand Your Ground Case
Edited by
msharmony
on
Wed 03/28/12 03:15 PM
|
|
There are two main moments in this case that are extremely important. . . . and really only two. Either man could have started the fight, but this is ACTUALLY, not an element that is important to the legitimacy of the self defense claim. A fist fight can occur where both parties claim the other started it. If at any time one person is able to disable, knock down, or otherwise prevent the other party from effectively continuing in the fight then the "fair" part of the fight is over. It is now an unequal force equation. Once this occurs the person who was able to render their opponent disabled, or knock them out of an equal force stand up fight, then they have the ability to disengage. This is a pivotal moment in any physical altercation. The right thing to do is disengage. The wrong thing to do is to continue to attack the person who has been knocked down, or rendered disabled. A person who gets hit in the face who is off balance and stumbling around is just as disabled as a person who is knocked down (dont have the case law handy, but its out there). In this particular case, the most pivotal piece of evidence is the witness who says he saw Zimmerman on his back, and Martin continuing the attack. When this person came out and claims to have yelled for Martin to stop his attack, this was ANOTHER point at which Martin had a choice to end the encounter. With a third party on the scene it makes sense to stop attacking and seek an establishment of the facts. So twice he had an option to end the attack, regardless of how the scenario started this means that Martin through his own choices and actions setup a scenario where the person being attacked did not know that his attacker would stop. This establishes an objective reasonable belief that deadly force was needed to stop the attack. People die from beatings all the time, if the beating is not going to stop, you are going to die. < objective. This is so over the top damning that any third party who understands the law would be hard pressed to even imagine any possible evidence could over turn such a thing. These are the facts which make an arrest on Zimmerman highly unlikely to ever occur for the crime of manslaughter. nonsense. IF A GUN IS INVOLVED< disengaging stops being an option because noone can outrun a bullet,,,, not to mention the scenario is not legally accurate either as to what constitutes self defense the UCR itself states "As a general rule, any death caused by injuries received in a fight, argument, quarrel, assault, or commission of a crime is classified as Murder and Nonnegligent Manslaughter " so there is no steadfast rule thats going to back up an automatic self defense just because the last man standing has injuries from a fight with the deceased,,,, in this case there is sufficient evidence to prove either self defense or non negligent manslaughter,,,at the least |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
The Stand Your Ground Case
|
|
The cops were in Zimmerman’s corner, protecting him, from the very beginning—and treating Trayvon Martin like he was the criminal: ● The police didn’t charge Zimmerman with anything, accepting his claim that he acted in self-defense... even though Zimmerman had a gun and Trayvon Martin was “armed” with Skittles and an iced-tea; even though Zimmerman weighs 250 pounds and Trayvon Martin weighed 140 pounds. ● The police told Trayvon’s father one reason Zimmerman wasn’t arrested was because they respected his education background in criminal justice and he had a “squeaky clean” record... ● The police corrected a witness who said she heard a very young voice cry for help, telling her to say she heard Zimmerman call for help... even though three witnesses said they heard the “desperate wail of a child, a gunshot, and then silence.” (Miami Herald) ● The police did a background check on Trayvon Martin as he lay dead, but not on Zimmerman, the murderer. They tested Trayvon Martin’s blood for alcohol and drugs but not Zimmerman’s. ● The police didn’t even talk to Trayvon Martin’s girlfriend, who had been on the phone with him before and during part of the attack. http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=29987 The police were and are in Zimmers corner because of the facts. Fact one Martin was a juvenile deliquent who was currently on suspension from school for drug and other offenses. Fact two Zimmerman backed off when told by the dispatcher. Witness accounts show that Martin approached Zimmer after he backed off and asked hi if he had a problem and when Zimmer stated no Martin stated you do now and priceeded to attack Zimmer. Fact three an eye witness who is not related to and did not know Zimmerman stated that Zimmerman was on the ground screaming for help as Martin was on top of him beating the daylights our of him. I can keep going if you want. This is why crap shouldn't be tried in the court of public opinion and in the court of law. Fact two is not a fact at all, it is a claim,, there is nothing physical to confirm or deny it,,,, I also would like to be pointed to OFFICIAL document stating from a witness that they saw martin approach zimmer after he backed off...or the other you do now ,,,,,and Im not speaking about JUST news accounts or blogs,,,, I also would like to see the evidence of a report taken AT THE TIME by police that someone saw zimmerman on the ground and the accompanying 911 call that would have certainly followed to validate the 'witness' claim the only FACT there is that Martin had been suspended for having a marijuana baggie,,, the rest are unverified CLAIMS,,,,,being reported by media and repeated by their competitors The Orlando Sentinel reported that Zimmerman told police he lost Martin in the neighborhood he regularly patrolled and was walking back to his vehicle last month when the youth approached him from behind. The two exchanged words, Zimmerman said, and Martin punched him, jumped on top of him and began banging his head on a sidewalk. Zimmerman said he began crying for help; Martin's family thinks it was their son who was crying out. Witness accounts differ, and emergency tapes in which the voices are heard are not clear. A statement from Sanford, Florida police said the newspaper story was "consistent" with evidence turned over to prosecutors. Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/03/27/police-zimmerman-story-is-consistent-with-evidence-in-trayvon-martin-shooting/#ixzz1qOe8F2eo Police are confirming the evidence backs up Zimmermans timeline of events. Oh yeam, good, honest hard working kids dont get suspended from school. and good law abiding men dont go around beating on their girlfriends or pushing on cops unless they do people arent perfect, the kid was 'good' enough to be volunteering several days a week and getting As and Bs in school,,,,, but I guess if a teen smokes pot or uses graffiti that i ndicates they probably are violent, tooo and likewise, an actual HISTORY of aggressive behavior might indicate someone is probably violent when offended as well and since we can assume neither KNEW what type of past behaviors the other had, lets assume they could only judge based upon the actions THAT night (when a grown man possessing a gun followed a 'suspicious' kid and a kid fought with that man and lost his life) and since we will assume both MIGHT Have a violent propensity, why dont we investigate what ACTUALLY happened as opposed to just taking the shooters word for it,,? He was volunteering to make himself look better to end the suspension early.
They investigated what happened and witnesses confirmed what Zimmersaid but because it didn't paint the little black boy as a saint it can not possibly be accurate can it? 
I dont really know. The witnesses were multiple on a dark and rainy night and their own statements dont exactly match each other. Im not sure which of those several witnesses you are referring to that confirmed zimmerman was just confronted and cold sucker punched by the kid,, but it would be interesting to hear since the tapes were all of 911 calls of people that were only ALARMED from the noise of the crying that I presume would have begun AFTER a fight began. btw. He volunteered for six YEARS,,I dont think it has anything to do with being suspended for ten days. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Agreed about the tool part and too bad too many "tools" have them and make it bad for all of us. Fact Sheet: Guns Save Lives * Guns used 2.5 million times a year in self-defense. Law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year -- or about 6,850 times a day. This means that each year, firearms are used more than 80 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives. * Of the 2.5 million times citizens use their guns to defend themselves every year, the overwhelming majority merely brandish their gun or fire a warning shot to scare off their attackers. Less than 8% of the time, a citizen will kill or wound his/her attacker. In comparison, there were 613 accidental gun deaths in 2007. So you would rather have 2.5 million people victimized, some of them raped or killed, than have people legally carry guns? That just doesn't make sense to me. And just like tools they are designed for very specific jobs. Not any everyday "tool" needs have one to shoot a kid with a soda and a bag of candy. He was being beaten by the "kid". Do you not get that part or do you not care? Wait, let me guess, you blame the victim. Zimmerman deserved to get his *** beat, because he legally followed Trayvon. So how is that any different from saying that a woman who dresses provocatively deserves to be raped? Or the tools who let the kids get their tool and kill their brother, the tool who shoots his whole family, the tool who kills his coworkers, tool who lets his tool get stolen, tool who uses his tool to intimidate the neighbors, tool who road rages with his tool, etc...
Guns save more lives than are taken by accident. Far more lives. this has a lack of connection defend against a criminal,,,,could mean 'defending' against burglary, theft, drug trafficking, and a number of other crimes the very notion that so many just 'brandish' a gun of fire a warning shot implies that there is no actual VIOLENCE going on so the claim that guns are 'saving more lives' does not follow just because crimes are being stopped,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Getting back to the situation in Florida. Ever hear “Get Whitey”. Florida is just,,,different, right up there with Arizona and Texas.... Every state is just different from each other in philosophy, opinion and yes laws across the board, period. Florida isn't like Texas or Arizona anymore than Maryland is like Pennsylvania, New York, or Virginia........just a for instance one state may carry certain elected TANF/AFDC benefits for single unemployed individuals as well as families and another state may only allow for families to receive assistance in that assistance group I Wasnt referring to differences in a broad sense of anything that varies between states I was speaking of difference in the sense of how the citizens appear to view life,,,,and 'suspicious'..... |
|
|
|
|
Previous
