Rangerland Forum Information

[xcdudesquadloves...]

http://www.buzzfeed.com/mjs538/people-who-...obama-is-racist

[Greatone]

Verd, if he didnt track down Martin because he was black why exactly did Zimmerman find a 17 year old kid walking in his neighborhood so suspicious?

[VerdDogg]

Verd, if he didnt track down Martin because he was black why exactly did Zimmerman find a 17 year old kid walking in his neighborhood so suspicious?

Same reason why he called the police because someone left their front door open... or the same reason he called the cops because kids were playing in the street.

Because he was just a nutjob.

[Greatone]

Ok I can agree with that.

[leetchie69]

Meanwhile something as stupid as an anonymous player talking bad about Sanchez...you were swearing by it to be true.

I was? I don't remember that.

[leetchie69]

http://www.buzzfeed.com/mjs538/people-who-...obama-is-racist

[Rocha]

I dunno, in the end I'm not sure if it matters whether or not he was a racist because outside of some damning evidence, it would be really hard to prove. What matters is he gets tried for murdering someone without any seeming provocation. If the justice system works in this case, I'd assume he'll be spending a few decades in the tank.

Y'ask me, this is all tied into the comically embarrassing gun laws in this country and the mentality of many gun owners where they do fashion themselves as modern day ranchers and think they have a right to shoot anyone "on their land." Rural America wears its irrational paranoia like a badge of honor, it's insane.

[Knight of Dight]

I dunno, in the end I'm not sure if it matters whether or not he was a racist because outside of some damning evidence, it would be really hard to prove. What matters is he gets tried for murdering someone without any seeming provocation. If the justice system works in this case, I'd assume he'll be spending a few decades in the tank.

Y'ask me, this is all tied into the comically embarrassing gun laws in this country and the mentality of many gun owners where they do fashion themselves as modern day ranchers and think they have a right to shoot anyone "on their land." Rural America wears its irrational paranoia like a badge of honor, it's insane.

Define what you mean by "on my land." If someone forcibly enters my home, you better believe I will not hesitate to use lethal force if necessary.

Also, when was the last time you visited "the South?" Big Business (i.e. farms owned and operated by large companies that mass-produce crappy processed food) and the exponential growth of housing districts drove out the vast majority of private farmers, so you have very few truly "rural" areas anymore. It doesn't take very long for developers to build houses, so most of what used to be farmland has been turned into subdivisions.

This post has been edited by Knight of Dight: Mar 25 2012, 06:36 PM

[Alitaki]

Define what you mean by "on my land." If someone forcibly enters my home, you better believe I will not hesitate to use lethal force if necessary.

I love this logic. It's the kind that usually ends with a father killing one of his kids or a relative.

[Knight of Dight]

Define what you mean by "on my land." If someone forcibly enters my home, you better believe I will not hesitate to use lethal force if necessary.

I love this logic. It's the kind that usually ends with a father killing one of his kids or a relative.

It depends.

If you live nowhere near any relatives and everybody in your family is asleep at night, it's safe to assume that anyone trying to get in doesn't mean well.

This post has been edited by Knight of Dight: Mar 25 2012, 09:07 PM

[leetchie69]

Define what you mean by "on my land." If someone forcibly enters my home, you better believe I will not hesitate to use lethal force if necessary.

I love this logic. It's the kind that usually ends with a father killing one of his kids or a relative.

It depends.

If you live nowhere near any relatives and everybody in your family is asleep at night, it's safe to assume that anyone trying to get in doesn't mean well.

Or just looking for some milk and coooooooooooooooooookies....

[leedsy99]

Also, Leedsy: http://blacksnob.com/snob_blog/2012/3/20/n...-being-goo.html

What does this have to do with me?

[Greatone]

Also, Leedsy: http://blacksnob.com/snob_blog/2012/3/20/n...-being-goo.html

What does this have to do with me?

You are clearly an ignorant racist.

[Charlie]

I dunno, in the end I'm not sure if it matters whether or not he was a racist because outside of some damning evidence, it would be really hard to prove. What matters is he gets tried for murdering someone without any seeming provocation. If the justice system works in this case, I'd assume he'll be spending a few decades in the tank.

Y'ask me, this is all tied into the comically embarrassing gun laws in this country and the mentality of many gun owners where they do fashion themselves as modern day ranchers and think they have a right to shoot anyone "on their land." Rural America wears its irrational paranoia like a badge of honor, it's insane.

Define what you mean by "on my land." If someone forcibly enters my home, you better believe I will not hesitate to use lethal force if necessary.

Also, when was the last time you visited "the South?" Big Business (i.e. farms owned and operated by large companies that mass-produce crappy processed food) and the exponential growth of housing districts drove out the vast majority of private farmers, so you have very few truly "rural" areas anymore. It doesn't take very long for developers to build houses, so most of what used to be farmland has been turned into subdivisions.

The idea is that those kinds of situations are so freaking rare. People get themselves so worked up about "my home is my castle" that they don't realize home invasions (while the person is home) are the exception, not the norm. They are obviously some of the most horrific cases out there, so when they happen you hear all about them. In reality, crime is at some of its lowest levels in decades.

I spend most of the year in North Carolina. I have a ton of friends from the area. The city kids and country kids obviously have different options, but they are almost unanimously pro-gun rights. Why? They like hunting, they think guns are cool, but the overwhelming reason is self-defense.

There is a reason people oppose things like waiting periods, background checks, and assault rifle bans. They want a gun, and they want it now. Why? Self-defense. They want to be able to shoot anybody who comes after them. They work themselves up with gallant fantasies of self-defense.

http://www.homeinvasionnews.com/if-you-see...tics-dont-look/

Good read.

[Alitaki]

I thought guns were cool too. When I was 10. Then I grew up and realized what awful things they are.

[Beamer]

Also, Leedsy: http://blacksnob.com/snob_blog/2012/3/20/n...-being-goo.html

What does this have to do with me?

In response to your posts that you didn't think this was racist (just a "racist component") and that it was unfairly stoking flames.

[leedsy99]

In response to your posts that you didn't think this was racist (just a "racist component") and that it was unfairly stoking flames.

She's a blogger commenting on the case. How is that conclusive proof of anything? And just to remain consistent to my criticisms, her response is what I would warn about -- drawing sweeping conclusions from a tragic isolated incident. How is it helpful to combat the stereotype by empowering the stereotype? "Black people aren't safe in America." Great. Wolves are at the doors too.

[Kusand]

Meanwhile, I'm a little bothered by your assertion that LeBron James couldn't possibly have ever experienced discrimination, that he's wrong that young black men are disadvantaged, he shouldn't discuss it, and that apparently everyone should just stop mentioning race because this is just an isolated incident. Do you really believe that we're truly a post-racial society?

This post has been edited by Kusand: Mar 26 2012, 09:17 AM

[Beamer]

In response to your posts that you didn't think this was racist (just a "racist component") and that it was unfairly stoking flames.

She's a blogger commenting on the case. How is that conclusive proof of anything? And just to remain consistent to my criticisms, her response is what I would warn about -- drawing sweeping conclusions from a tragic isolated incident. How is it helpful to combat the stereotype by empowering the stereotype? "Black people aren't safe in America." Great. Wolves are at the doors too.

It isn't meant to be conclusive proof of anything, it's supposed to be a counterpoint coming from someone much closer to this situation than you are. Yes, it's full of emotion. Perhaps that emotion deserves some credence. Or perhaps we can say "this is an isolated instance, everything else is fine, why should we be the ones to try to change things?"
You didn't say that last part, but it kind of comes with the first two.

[HDH]

It isn't meant to be conclusive proof of anything, it's supposed to be a counterpoint coming from someone much closer to this situation than you are. Yes, it's full of emotion. Perhaps that emotion deserves some credence. Or perhaps we can say "this is an isolated instance, everything else is fine, why should we be the ones to try to change things?"
You didn't say that last part, but it kind of comes with the first two.

That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Just because someone says something more passionately than someone else doesn't make it any more true or valid. In fact, it's quite the opposite. The less passionate about a topic, the more likely to be objective.

[SorryaboutthatWh...]

I thought guns were cool too. When I was 10. Then I grew up and realized what awful things they are.

Way to shit on guns.

[Beamer]

It isn't meant to be conclusive proof of anything, it's supposed to be a counterpoint coming from someone much closer to this situation than you are. Yes, it's full of emotion. Perhaps that emotion deserves some credence. Or perhaps we can say "this is an isolated instance, everything else is fine, why should we be the ones to try to change things?"
You didn't say that last part, but it kind of comes with the first two.

That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Just because someone says something more passionately than someone else doesn't make it any more true or valid. In fact, it's quite the opposite. The less passionate about a topic, the more likely to be objective.

That wasn't the point I made. Instead, I was trying to point out that she's passionate because, unlike I believe every single person on this board, she's hasn't lived life as a middle class white person, which is where that emotion comes from, and which may make her opinion one worth paying attention to in matters such as these.

[Hockey101]

And of course you have Newt and Shamtorum chiming in on this issue criticizing Obama.

I hate this.

[Alitaki]

I thought guns were cool too. When I was 10. Then I grew up and realized what awful things they are.

Way to shit on guns.

There he is!

[SorryaboutthatWh...]

I thought guns were cool too. When I was 10. Then I grew up and realized what awful things they are.

Way to shit on guns.

There he is!

[leedsy99]

Meanwhile, I'm a little bothered by your assertion that LeBron James couldn't possibly have ever experienced discrimination, that he's wrong that young black men are disadvantaged, he shouldn't discuss it, and that apparently everyone should just stop mentioning race because this is just an isolated incident. Do you really believe that we're truly a post-racial society?

To answer the last question, yes. We've made tremendous progress on the racial front in light of our terrible history. "Post-racial" in the sense of race never mattering? That will never happen, in my opinion, due to our human nature of protecting our own identity while fearing someone else's. As for the Lebron stuff, I didn't mean to discredit his experiences in life ... but the thing with experience is that we all have them, positive and negative. I've been discriminated for my looks too. I have a real problem with a highly affluent celebrity claiming that some faceless authoritarian system treats him differently because of his skin color when all evidence shows that the same society rewards him handsomely for his unique skills and personality. Race matters, sure. But proclaiming a "stereotype" -- a convenient conclusion about someone/something based solely on generalized information -- after a significnt amount of progress that has been made in our culture. Do paranoid white people really go around shooting "good" black kids because they look like thugs all the time? Do people of Arab dissent really think all white people consider them terrorists? You credit the stereotype by empowering the stereotype, and that's what I have a problem here, particularly because I don't see that the guy acted with purely racist intent here.

It isn't meant to be conclusive proof of anything, it's supposed to be a counterpoint coming from someone much closer to this situation than you are.

She's a black blogger from St. Louis. How is she closer to this than me? That's my problem with her, and everything else -- this idea that we should credit what I think is unnecessary conclusions just because of where the source comes from (in this case, Black America or whatever you want to call it). It's a tragedy. Arrest and prosecute the guy. But I don't want to accept that we're fueling further paranoia, just because the source is a traditionally marginalized and historically discriminated group of people. There is racial sensitivity, but I don't think we should shy away from criticizing a stupid reaction to something just because of that sensitivity. I know that no one is defending this, but for God's sake the Black Panther Party offered a bounty on the guy -- that's fucking insane. But to me it comes from the same fundamental frustration as that of this blogger. Why empower this by drawing sweeping conclusions?

Just to be clear, I'm not against protests and marches and cries for justice. If I had time, I would participate. I hope he gets arrested. But I'm not buying that this is an example of racial injustice in America.

[Dunc]

If the shooter was black and the victim was white and everything else was the same up to the point the police arrived, does any rational and unbiased person believe that the shooter would not have been arrested on the spot? Been immediately brought in for questioning? Had his criminal background checked as well as drug and alcohol tests?

I think not.

And that isn't even addressing whether the shooter was actions were tainted by racism; just the police who 'handled' the immediate aftermath.

There is plenty of racism in this country. Just because it isn't as prevalent and accepted as it once was doesn't mean it's gone or that it is in any way less repugnant.

[SorryaboutthatWh...]

If the shooter was black and the victim was white and everything else was the same up to the point the police arrived, does any rational and unbiased person believe that the shooter would not have been arrested on the spot? Been immediately brought in for questioning? Had his criminal background checked as well as drug and alcohol tests?

I think not.

I honestly believe with the way the laws are set up in Florida, and if the man was a member of a neighborhood watch it could've quite possibly went down the same exact way.

This isn't a fair question though, it's completely loaded. I actually think racism is a problem in this country, but because I answered the way I did, it's easily turned into "well you are so naive" and then there's no basis for discussion. It's either we agree, or I'm an idiot.

[Beamer]

But I'm not buying that this is an example of racial injustice in America.

Which I find very surprising, as I'm not sure how to see it any other way. The shooter wasn't arrested.

[Dunc]

If the shooter was black and the victim was white and everything else was the same up to the point the police arrived, does any rational and unbiased person believe that the shooter would not have been arrested on the spot? Been immediately brought in for questioning? Had his criminal background checked as well as drug and alcohol tests?

I think not.

I honestly believe with the way the laws are set up in Florida, and if the man was a member of a neighborhood watch it could've quite possibly went down the same exact way.

This isn't a fair question though, it's completely loaded. I actually think racism is a problem in this country, but because I answered the way I did, it's easily turned into "well you are so naive" and then there's no basis for discussion. It's either we agree, or I'm an idiot.

Unlike others here, I never stoop to that level and you're an ass for implying that I would.

While I suppose that technically it is possible - due to the ways the laws are set up in Florida as you say - that it could go down the exact same way I think you're being willfully naive or deliberately argumentative to say 'quite possibly'.

I think that maybe in some town with a powerful and/or politically connected minority population, it would go down the exact same way, but we are both just offerign conjecture.

[ultimate steve]

Guns aren't awful things. People are awful things. You know who will always have guns if they are completely banned to civilians? Only the worst people and criminals. Criminals/gangs don't go to the gun shop and buy their guns and get background checks. If you want to say that home invasions are a rare occurrence, well so are cases like the trayvon murder. So is columbine. I've heard about more home invasions in Nassau county in the last 6 months than I've heard of any cases like the trayvon thing. A close childhood friend of mines cousin, who I also knew growing up was a victim of a home invasion in Suffolk county roughly 10 years ago. He's dead.

[xcdudesquadloves...]

If the shooter was black and the victim was white and everything else was the same up to the point the police arrived, does any rational and unbiased person believe that the shooter would not have been arrested on the spot? Been immediately brought in for questioning? Had his criminal background checked as well as drug and alcohol tests?

I think not.

I honestly believe with the way the laws are set up in Florida, and if the man was a member of a neighborhood watch it could've quite possibly went down the same exact way.

This isn't a fair question though, it's completely loaded. I actually think racism is a problem in this country, but because I answered the way I did, it's easily turned into "well you are so naive" and then there's no basis for discussion. It's either we agree, or I'm an idiot.

Unlike others here, I never stoop to that level and you're an ass for implying that I would.

While I suppose that technically it is possible - due to the ways the laws are set up in Florida as you say - that it could go down the exact same way I think you're being willfully naive or deliberately argumentative to say 'quite possibly'.

I think that maybe in some town with a powerful and/or politically connected minority population, it would go down the exact same way, but we are both just offerign conjecture.

As soon as you ask if the race roles were reversed, you're asking a loaded question.

It doesn't matter anyway in this instance since there is NO counter factual. There's no way of knowing. It's also incredibly difficult to prove without reasonable doubt that this is a hate crime. The evidence points in that direction, but there is no real concrete evidence that it was racially motivated besides a possible (but not 100% concrete) reference to him calling Trayvon a "coon." The fact is, the guy seems to be a paranoid nutjob and Trayvon got caught in the wrong place wrong time most likely doing nothing wrong. It's a horrible tragedy.

[ultimate steve]

Zimmerman appears to be Latino. Is he not?

[Knight of Dight]

I thought guns were cool too. When I was 10. Then I grew up and realized what awful things they are.

When you grow up in a military community, your view of weapons is different. Guns are only as good or bad as they people using them.

And yes, home invasions are not the norm and hopefully that is something I never have to deal with. But I like to rest easy that if something like that were to occur, I would be able to defend myself.

[Alitaki]

Guns aren't awful things. People are awful things. You know who will always have guns if they are completely banned to civilians? Only the worst people and criminals. Criminals/gangs don't go to the gun shop and buy their guns and get background checks. If you want to say that home invasions are a rare occurrence, well so are cases like the trayvon murder. So is columbine. I've heard about more home invasions in Nassau county in the last 6 months than I've heard of any cases like the trayvon thing. A close childhood friend of mines cousin, who I also knew growing up was a victim of a home invasion in Suffolk county roughly 10 years ago. He's dead.

# of gun deaths in the US per 100k = 10.27
# of gun deaths in England/Wales per 100k = .46
# of gun deaths in Scotland per 100k = .58

Want just homicides?

# of gun homicides in the US per 100k = 4.4
# of gun homicides in England\Wales per 100k = .07
# of gun homicides in Scotland per 100k = .19

Correlation? Less guns = less gun deaths.

This isn't voodoo math. It's fact. Get the guns off the streets and there will be less gun deaths in this country. Why the average citizen needs to own anything beyond a hunting rifle/shotgun is beyond me. Any schmuck who can pass a background check can get a gun in this country. I don't trust half the population with a car let alone a gun and you need to go through mandatory training to be licensed to operate a vehicle. In NYS and NYC, no such training is required to get a gun license.

Police officers are trained on their firearms for hours and have to qualify their proficiency with their weapon every year (if not more often). Cops are trained in situations where the use of deadly force is warranted. The average public? It is on them to get training and instruction and even if they do get training and instruction on how to use a firearm properly, they're never trained on dealing with situations where they would need to deadly force.

This post has been edited by Alitaki: Mar 26 2012, 11:47 AM

[Dunc]

If the shooter was black and the victim was white and everything else was the same up to the point the police arrived, does any rational and unbiased person believe that the shooter would not have been arrested on the spot? Been immediately brought in for questioning? Had his criminal background checked as well as drug and alcohol tests?

I think not.

I honestly believe with the way the laws are set up in Florida, and if the man was a member of a neighborhood watch it could've quite possibly went down the same exact way.

This isn't a fair question though, it's completely loaded. I actually think racism is a problem in this country, but because I answered the way I did, it's easily turned into "well you are so naive" and then there's no basis for discussion. It's either we agree, or I'm an idiot.

Unlike others here, I never stoop to that level and you're an ass for implying that I would.

While I suppose that technically it is possible - due to the ways the laws are set up in Florida as you say - that it could go down the exact same way I think you're being willfully naive or deliberately argumentative to say 'quite possibly'.

I think that maybe in some town with a powerful and/or politically connected minority population, it would go down the exact same way, but we are both just offerign conjecture.

As soon as you ask if the race roles were reversed, you're asking a loaded question.

It doesn't matter anyway in this instance since there is NO counter factual. There's no way of knowing. It's also incredibly difficult to prove without reasonable doubt that this is a hate crime. The evidence points in that direction, but there is no real concrete evidence that it was racially motivated besides a possible (but not 100% concrete) reference to him calling Trayvon a "coon." The fact is, the guy seems to be a paranoid nutjob and Trayvon got caught in the wrong place wrong time most likely doing nothing wrong. It's a horrible tragedy.

I didn't deny that it was a loaded question and I tacitly stated that it was all conjecture, as was SATS response which I acknowledged I couldn't possibly prove to be true or false.

I also was really casting an aspersion that the police handling of the situation was racist - not the shooter or his actions.

[Beamer]

I thought guns were cool too. When I was 10. Then I grew up and realized what awful things they are.

But I like to rest easy that if something like that were to occur, I would be able to defend myself.

Or get shot in the face because the guy that invaded your home is more ready to use that gun and now views you as a threat instead of just a target.


Not sure where I fall on the gun control arguments, but I do find it amusing that a friend checked out an unlicensed daycare and/or babysitting place (I'm not sure what likely illegal grey area this was) and was shocked to see two gun racks in the middle of the place. "We like to let the children play with our guns," the lady said, but pointed out that the barrels were removed from the revolvers. But the hammers were still there. She also said she smokes in the room and she refuses to discipline.
We're an interesting species.

[Alitaki]

Zimmerman appears to be Latino. Is he not?

Half latino, half white.

I thought guns were cool too. When I was 10. Then I grew up and realized what awful things they are.

When you grow up in a military community, your view of weapons is different. Guns are only as good or bad as they people using them.

To that I say, want to play soldier? Join the military. Wanna play cop? Become a cop. Go through the training. Then, maybe, I'll trust you with a gun.

When I was a kid, I didn't grow up in a military community and I thought guns were the shit. I used to buy Guns & Ammo magazine. I still maintain a more than nominal interest in firearms, but purely on an educational level. I'm still fascinated by the shows on the Military Channel or Discovery where they show off the latest and greatest weapons. There was an episode on long range sniper rifles that I completely enjoyed. Even so, I still think guns can only lead to bad, especially in an untrained population.

[Alitaki]

I thought guns were cool too. When I was 10. Then I grew up and realized what awful things they are.

But I like to rest easy that if something like that were to occur, I would be able to defend myself.

Or get shot in the face because the guy that invaded your home is more ready to use that gun and now views you as a threat instead of just a target.

Well you know, he's a stone cold assassin with ninja skills when it comes to defending his home. He didn't just get woken up, then had to fumble for the gun locker key, then the trigger lock key all while a growing sense of terror builds in him. He sleeps on the barcalounger with one eye open and the loaded gun in his lap. He's all cool and calm when going out into the dark house to meet the invaders head on and not at all scared that they're already in his kid's room and the gun isn't shaking in his hands because he's never had to deal with a situation like this before. When he sees the shadow moving, he's gonna unload the clip (you have to read that with Sen Dog's voice in mind) and if he hasn't killed the cat, a stray will probably have gone out the window and into his neighbor's house. But hey, he's resting easy.

[Knight of Dight]

I thought guns were cool too. When I was 10. Then I grew up and realized what awful things they are.

But I like to rest easy that if something like that were to occur, I would be able to defend myself.

Or get shot in the face because the guy that invaded your home is more ready to use that gun and now views you as a threat instead of just a target.

Well you know, he's a stone cold assassin with ninja skills when it comes to defending his home. He didn't just get woken up, then had to fumble for the gun locker key, then the trigger lock key all while a growing sense of terror builds in him. He sleeps on the barcalounger with one eye open and the loaded gun in his lap. He's all cool and calm when going out into the dark house to meet the invaders head on and not at all scared that they're already in his kid's room and the gun isn't shaking in his hands because he's never had to deal with a situation like this before. When he sees the shadow moving, he's gonna unload the clip (you have to read that with Sen Dog's voice in mind) and if he hasn't killed the cat, a stray will probably have gone out the window and into his neighbor's house. But hey, he's resting easy.

[Tex]

but...but...the zombie 'pocalypse...?

srsly, though, I very much agree that guns in the hands of civilians are only as good as their safety training. IMO, any concealed carry license needs to come with, like, a mandatory 6 week "boot camp"... Some sort of intense training that covers the myriad dangers of being untrained and reinforces how more things can go wrong than right when civies attempt to use lethal force. AND, civies, just like LE, should have to re-qualify every year. Hey, all that training and licensing stuff would even be taxable (to say nothing of the watch lists it would generate). Why wouldn't the gubmint go that route on this subject?

the only flipside to the gun-free land is that criminals need never fear being shot. I'm a little curious to know what the mugging/assault rate is per 100K in Great Britain, to perhaps confirm or deny if gun freedoms provide any deterrent, comparatively.

[Beamer]

but...but...the zombie 'pocalypse...?

Is best handled with blunt weapons! Guns need ammo, reloading and accuracy, and blades get stuck!


This is where I'd insert 28 Days Later video/gif if I could find something.

[Alitaki]

but...but...the zombie 'pocalypse...?

Is best handled with blunt weapons! Guns need ammo, reloading and accuracy, and blades get stuck!

And guns draw attention. You do not want to draw attention to yourself in the Zombie Apocalypse.

[leedsy99]

Which I find very surprising, as I'm not sure how to see it any other way. The shooter wasn't arrested.

Which could be accounted for for any number of reasons that don't necessarily amount to racism. In fact, here's the local article first detailing the shooting, of note it suggests that the investigation is continuing. Here's the announcement that no arrest would be made by the police department, which is according to statute. And here's the grand jury investigating the matter, again by statute.

Further, the information that is being circulated right now comes mostly from the Martin's civil attorney, through FOIL requests. The have a high stake is this case, not simply for justice for their son but also because this is a million dollar story and law-suit. I mention this not to smear the Martin family in any way, but their lawyers are spinning a story while the police and prosecutors are forced BY STATUTE to keep silent. For example, in the second article (and now plastered everywhere), the attorneys for Martin suggest that the police "lied" when they said that Zimmerman had no criminal record ... but criminal records means conviction, and since his previous arrest was dismissed, he has no criminal record. So they actually told the truth, which is spun by lawyers to suggest dishonesty during the investigation. So now someone just as squeaky clean as the victim comes across as a troubled person with past run-in's with the law.

The same thing applies to the idea that the police botched the investigation by not testing the shooter for alcohol/drugs. They are looking for avenues to criticize the investigation to show that it was not followed by normal procedures, no matter how irrelevant it was. The vast majority of police calls involve people under the influence of alcohol/drugs, and they received specialized training to determine if someone is under the influence. If their training and common sense is going to tell them that the test will have no utility, do they really need to waste time to do it? (And that's assuming that they did nothing, which may not be true because all the information has yet to be revealed.)

This post has been edited by leedsy99: Mar 26 2012, 12:37 PM

[Tex]

And guns draw attention. You do not want to draw attention to yourself in the Zombie Apocalypse.

I am clearly not prepared for the zombie 'pocalypse.

[Alitaki]

And guns draw attention. You do not want to draw attention to yourself in the Zombie Apocalypse.

I am clearly not prepared for the zombie 'pocalypse.

That's OK. If I run into Zombie Tex, I promise to cave your skull in with a mace.

[Kusand]

The same thing applies to the idea that the police botched the investigation by not testing the shooter for alcohol/drugs. They are looking for avenues to criticize the investigation to show that it was not followed by normal procedures, no matter how irrelevant it was. The vast majority of police calls involve people under the influence of alcohol/drugs, and they received specialized training to determine if someone is under the influence. If their training and common sense is going to tell them that the test will have no utility, do they really need to waste time to do it? (And that's assuming that they did nothing, which may not be true because all the information has yet to be revealed.)

Isn't this whole "trust their training and common sense" stuff the very basis of accusations of special treatment and discrimination? If the belief is that the investigation was botched due to racism, that sort of judgment call is the exact thing being called into question.

[Knight of Dight]

But with guns, you can always shoot yourself if you find yourself getting overwhelmed, and spare yourself a nasty un-death.

[Sed]

But with guns, you can always shoot yourself if you find yourself getting overwhelmed, and spare yourself a nasty un-death.

Or during a massive eruption of WTF in a plotline (e.g., Brother Cavill).

[Alitaki]

But with guns, you can always shoot yourself if you find yourself getting overwhelmed, and spare yourself a nasty un-death.

Or during a massive eruption of WTF in a plotline (e.g., Brother Cavill).

FRAK!



This post has been edited by Alitaki: Mar 26 2012, 01:05 PM