Posted on 07/17/2013 2:54:55 PM PDT by neverdem
Here's the link.
Grab me one while you are at it please...
Déjà vu....
LED...no nasty LCDs.
I want my new big screen tv too and some bling, bling. Gots to have my bling, bling.
That will show that racist jury.
Breaking into cars and houses and stores is a bit more dangerous now than it once was. Also attacking someone while meaning to do bodily harm isn’t so safe anymore, either.
Plasma TV's are pretty well out of style now. As long as you're 5-finger shopping, you should be looking at the new LED TV's...
I agree with the jury once again. And I suspect that the forensic evidence from this case was also very clear, and supported the homeowner’s account.
The bottom line is that the honest citizenry has the right to defend itself against criminals. Color indifferent.
ROTFLOL!
Roderick Scott, a black man, was allowed to return to obscurity in Greece, NY in late 2009 after killing a white teenager in self defense. The story didn't mention the race of either party, but the video showed the defendant and the victim's families. White hispanic George Zimmerman is now infamous thanks to the BS media that wanted him crucified.
The shameless BS media that made nary a peep about Fast and Furious gun running to Mexican drug cartels under Holder, is now holding the water for the gun grabber's campaign against "stand your ground" laws, now in at least 31 states in one fashion or other. For some reason New Hampshire is missing from this map.
Blacks benefit from Florida ‘Stand Your Ground’ law at disproportionate rate
Stand Your Ground law critics push for Florida boycott
NRA blasts Holder for attacking 'stand-your-ground' laws after Zimmerman verdict
ERIC HOLDER’S STAND YOUR GROUND SQUIRREL
FReepmail me if you want no more of these relatively rare pings.
Everyone has a natural right to self defense.
Thanks for the ping.
I remember this incident. If I’m not mistaken, most if not all of us stood up for the “Black guy”.
This will really put a crimp in Stevie Wonder’s concert tours.
March 24, 2012What if Trayvon Had Been White, and the Shooter Black?
By Michael Filozof
What would happen if a black man armed with a handgun confronted "suspicious persons" in his neighborhood? What would happen if the "suspicious persons" were unarmed white teens, one of them was shot dead, and the shooter claimed self-defense?
This is not an exercise in mere speculation. We know what would happen in such a case. There would be no white mobs in the street chanting "No justice, no peace!" There would be no whites holding a "million hoodie march" in New York City. There would be no white equivalent of Al Sharpton, the professional race-baiter behind the 1987 Tawana Brawley hoax, leading marches in the streets of the shooter's hometown. There would be no Federal civil rights investigation by the Justice Department. There would be no comments from a president who seems congenitally unable to keep his mouth shut on matters involving left-wing political correctness. And there would be no national media attention from biased, left-wing "reporters."
We know this because in fact, such an event occurred in 2009 in Greece, N.Y., a suburb of Rochester. Roderick Scott, a black man, shot and killed an unarmed white teen, Christopher Cervini, whom he believed was burglarizing a neighbor's car, with a licensed .40 cal. handgun.
There are many similarities between the Scott-Cervini case and the George Zimmerman-Trayvon Martin case in Florida. In both cases, there had been a spate of criminal activity in the neighborhood. In both cases, the shooters called 911 to report suspicious activity, yet chose to confront the unarmed suspects outside their residence and off their own property prior to the arrival of the police. In both cases, the shooters claimed that they felt threatened, and fired in self-defense. In both cases, local law enforcement applied relevant state law.
Unlike Florida, New York does not have a "stand your ground" law. New York law allows a person to use deadly force to defend his residence from home invasion only as a last resort. It does not allow the use of deadly force to prevent a property crime, and requires retreat if possible. Thus, while Zimmerman was not arrested under Florida law, Scott was tried for manslaughter.
New York law does allow a person to use deadly force anywhere, including off his own property, if he feels that his life is in imminent danger and retreat is not possible. Despite the fact that he left his own property, confronted, and shot dead an unarmed white person thought to be committing a petty property crime, Scott was acquitted by a majority-white jury after claiming that the Cervini charged at him, putting him in imminent fear of his life.
Despite the racial difference between the shooter and the decedent, there were no allegations of racial bias. Scott was not charged with a hate crime. There was no Federal civil rights investigation. There were no white protests. The case was settled for what it was: a tragedy caused by a series of poor decisions on behalf of the shooter, and a split-second decision that will forever be second-guessed.
In all probability, the actions of Zimmerman in Florida were also based on a series of poor decisions: the decision to follow a suspect after a police dispatcher told him not to, the decision to confront a suspect with a firearm off his own property, and a split-second decision to shoot an unarmed person when Zimmerman felt his life was in imminent danger, resulting in tragedy. But a tragedy is not necessarily a Federal civil rights case - unless the mobs in the streets and their allies in the media and government want to make it one.
The truth of the matter is that "civil rights" cases are often little more than reverse lynch mobs. In the Old South of the past, white mobs would drag black suspects out of jail and lynch them in the streets if they felt the wheels of justice were turning too slowly. Today, black mobs, often led by the likes of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, lead street protests or riots, and the Federal government comes after white suspects with the "rope" of "civil rights" charges. And just like the old Southern sheriffs with ties to the Klan who turned a blind eye to the illegal actions of whites, the Department of Justice often refuses to act on "civil rights" violations when the perpetrators are black and the victims are white. In the eyes of the Federal government and the political Left, all whites are forever suspected of being gap-toothed Klansmen with shotguns and nooses in their pickup trucks, and all blacks are perpetually innocent, doe-eyed victims of white oppression.
This dynamic was made perfectly clear twenty years ago by the Los Angeles riots. Rodney King, a convicted felon, allegedly intoxicated, led police on a high-speed car chase and resisted arrest when he was finally cornered. Most people agree that the cops gave Rodney a few more licks than department procedures called for. But given King's background and the extenuating circumstances, the cops were acquitted of assault charges under state law. The black population of L.A. erupted in riots that killed 53 people, ignited thousands of arsons, and saw widespread looting. Korean merchants were racially targeted for arson, and resorted to defending their property with arms. Reginald Denny, a hapless white truck driver who inadvertently drove into the riots, was pulled from his vehicle by black rioters who smashed his skull in 91 places with a brick (inflicting far worse injuries than the cops had inflicted on King) and danced a jig over his prone body.
Long before Eric Holder became Attorney General, refused to prosecute black voter intimidation, and referred to blacks as "my people," the Department of Justice caved in to the pressure of the rioters by charging and convicting the L.A. cops with "civil rights" violations and sending them to Federal prison. But no such Federal charges were levied against the blacks who targeted the Koreans and attacked Reginald Denny.
Two years later, O.J. Simpson, a black defendant with a history of domestic violence, was accused of slashing the throats of two white people. But no "civil rights" or "hate crimes" charges were filed against him. No white protests erupted against Simpson or against the black community. Simpson, a black millionaire who had a career in sports, money, and fame that most white people can only dream about, was portrayed as a "victim" of the "racist" police. Blacks from coast to coast whooped and danced with joy when he was acquitted of double murder.
Certainly it's true that in the past, blacks have been victims of whites. But today the reality is quite different from what the street mobs, the government, the media and the P.C. crowd would have us believe. Far from being victims of white oppression, blacks today are disproportionately perpetrators of violent crimes against whites and against other blacks. According to data from the FBI Uniform Crime Reports, in 2009, "whites" -- a category that includes Hispanics -- were known to be responsible for 5,286 murders. Blacks, a mere 13% of the population, were known to be responsible for 5,980 murders. In 2005, the New Century Foundation's "Color of Crime" report found that "Blacks commit more violent crime against whites than against blacks. Forty-five percent of their victims are white, 43 percent are black, and 10 percent are Hispanic. When whites commit violent crime, only three percent of their victims are black" (emphasis mine). Also in 2005, the Department of Justice reported that one-third of rapes committed against white women (approximately 37,000) were perpetrated by blacks, while less than ten -- statistically zero -- rapes of black women were committed by whites.
Whatever happened in the George Zimmerman-Trayvon Martin case, one thing is perfectly clear: it's high time this country quit the racial dog-and-pony show, and judged each criminal case on its individual merits instead of allowing the race-baiting demagogues to leverage each incident for political advantage in the streets and in the media.
Thanks neverdem, great comment.
Later
The media is not going to change. It is filled with liberal white guilt goody two-shoes socialists.
A Conservative journalist doesn’t have a prayer in this Obama propaganda arm.
Why did the Trayvon Martin Shooting go National?
Relatives in high places
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/07/why_did_the_trayvon_martin_shooting_go_national.html#ixzz2ZOljzmgr
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
In Mass, I would have to retreat to the furthest point in my home, and then and only then could I shoot someone presenting a threat. And it had better be a life threat, and it would be best if I had it videotaped from three perspectives. And he better be holding a decapitated head. Then and only then could I shoot them.
We were told that if we can downstairs and someone was carrying our TV out the door we could not shoot them.
And then the cop training the class went on to tell us how to avoid speaking to the police after a shooting. He told us to feign chest pains and demand to be taken to the hospital. And then talk to no one without a lawyer.
Funny stuff.
I got my grievance hoodie and OE ready to go for rioting.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.