[Ronbo1948]

I’ll likely be banned for saying this, but....

If I had been on that jury, I’d voted Roeder “not guilty” because he stopped an arrogant mass murderer dead in his tracks.

In my humble opinion, Roeder’s was tantamount to the actions of those heroic Czech freedom fighters in 1942 who gunned down the monster Reinhard Heyrich, the head of the dread RHSA, the driving force behind the Holocaust and “The Hangman of Prague.”

The wrong man was on trial here. I can think of a long list of Leftist pro-abortion activists, judges and politicians who should be facing capital punishment for their role in the American Holocaust that has claimed over 30 million innocent lives since 1971.

[OCCASparky]

And that’s why you wouldn’t be let within 10 miles of any jury.

[Let's Roll]

Legally guilty, but morally justified.

[Balding_Eagle]

If I had been on that jury, I’d voted Roeder “not guilty” because he stopped an arrogant mass murderer dead in his tracks.

Tell us how your reasoning would apply in this ongoing case:

"The two women, Patricia Imani and Brianna Herrera, admit that they lay in the offramp from Interstate 5 in an effort to block the Strykers.

Both women said they should be found not guilty because they had to protest and although it was illegal, it prevented a greater harm.

“We have an obligation to resist, not just a right to resist. That is what these protests have been about since we started to do the human blockades against the Strykers,” Imani said."

http://www.kirotv.com/news/22357712/detail.html

How are you different than these two women? I can't see anny difference.

[Soothesayer]

It was legal to kill Jewish children in 1945 if I recall. Screw the liberals and their worthless laws.

[Melas]

The wrong man was on trial here. I can think of a long list of Leftist pro-abortion activists, judges and politicians who should be facing capital punishment for their role in the American Holocaust that has claimed over 30 million innocent lives since 1971.

You must hate that silly constitution that proscribes ex post facto punishment.

[meandog]

If I had been on that jury, I’d voted Roeder “not guilty” because he stopped an arrogant mass murderer dead in his tracks.

I believe Late Term Tiller was an abominable Dr. Mengele but unfortunately he also was "legal" in the opinion of Kansas lawmakers...that makes Roeder a murderer in the eyes of the law. He deserves the harshest sentence the law can mete out.

[factmart]

Ditto!

[chilltherats]

I would have voted “not guilty”, too, just to get a mistrial so the re-set button could be hit and Roeder could get a court-appointed attorney instead of that pathetic public defender.

The defense bar are mostly a bunch of lefties so nobody stepped up to advise Roeder he should press his right to competent counsel. If Roeder was a lefty who shot a cop, they’d be crawling all over him, especially if he was black. But none of them want to draw attention to his cause. Their attitude is to just shut up, sweep the SOB and the case under the carpet, and keep bemoaning the POS dead baby killer.

[Persevero]

I’d have voted ‘not guilty,’ too, Ronbo.

Our laws are so criminal on this issue, from my point of view, the law is protecting the criminals and murdering, sometimes torturing to death, the innocents.

This is the sort of thing that happens when there is no justice.

I wouldn’t do it myself, but I’d vote ‘not guilty’ if on a jury.

[RightOnline]

“In my humble opinion, Roeder’s was tantamount to the actions of those heroic Czech freedom fighters in 1942 who gunned down the monster Reinhard Heyrich, the head of the dread RHSA, the driving force behind the Holocaust and “The Hangman of Prague.”

If memory serves, those two guys got Heydrich with a grenade tossed into his car (a convertible; top down) as he/his driver drove by. He died a short time later; not at the scene.

[FutureRocketMan]

thank you. I am glad to see that someone agrees with me.