With all of the so called "evidence" to bust the civil/racist questions, and it being so obvious to so many, why worry about it?
I LOL'd. Seriously...
With all of the so called "evidence" to bust the civil/racist questions, and it being so obvious to so many, why worry about it?
I'll give you the protesting public driving the sensationalism of the case... It harkens to ancient Rome where popular opinion weighed heavily on the death or life of their fellow people and slaves. It's terrible. But those people have a voice, and every right to voice those opinions. The gov has the duty to make damn sure no rights were violated. Juror B37 clearly stated that race had nothing to do with Zim's use of self defense. Most of y'all have stated that the evidence of his history clearly bunks the allegations... So what's really the problem here? Thugs have rights too.
I'll give you the protesting public driving the sensationalism of the case... It harkens to ancient Rome where popular opinion weighed heavily on the death or life of their fellow people and slaves. It's terrible. But those people have a voice, and every right to voice those opinions. The gov has the duty to make damn sure no rights were violated. Juror B37 clearly stated that race had nothing to do with Zim's use of self defense. Most of y'all have stated that the evidence of his history clearly bunks the allegations... So what's really the problem here? Thugs have rights too.
The problem is a president and attorney general interjecting racial bias and prejudice before they're evident. The problem is an attorney general continuing to threaten a man found not guilty in a court of law, from a racially aligned bully pulpit two days in a row now. What we're doing now is voicing OUR rights to demand the rule of law be respected and adhered to. The attorney general has zero business calling for changes in states law because of this incident. His only job as AG is to fairly and equitably enforce the laws on the books in federal statutes. In that situation, he should be keeping his damn mouth shut at this time.
As for thugs, do they have the right to savagely assault people who reasonably consider them and their actions suspicious?
So Holder says it's the fault of the Stand Your Ground Law, so once again it's back to attacking the 2nd amendment.
Yeh, looks like they are going to try to make us defenseless against violent attackers. Like on that video of that mom being attacked in her home around 3 weeks ago. I didn't see Holder or the President or Sharpton speaking up for her.
Enter your email address to join: