slim

I have a CHL.
I don't want background checks because I don't like the government having the power to decide who can and can't exercise constitutionally-protected rights. Kind of waters down that whole constitution thing. I find it amazing that otherwise intelligent, rational people believe giving the government the power to "think it over" when it comes to our rights is a good idea.
Not sure which amendment it'll be for most people to get ticked off to the point of changing it, but the 2nd isn't guaranteed, the 4th isn't guaranteed, the 9th and 10th are long gone, and it seems the 5th is next. Perhaps when they toss out the 3rd and you get house guests you'll start to care.
Wake up, America.

I have a CHL.
I don't want background checks because I don't like the government having the power to decide who can and can't exercise constitutionally-protected rights. Kind of waters down that whole constitution thing. I find it amazing that otherwise intelligent, rational people believe giving the government the power to "think it over" when it comes to our rights is a good idea.
Not sure which amendment it'll be for most people to get ticked off to the point of changing it, but the 2nd isn't guaranteed, the 4th isn't guaranteed, the 9th and 10th are long gone, and it seems the 5th is next. Perhaps when they toss out the 3rd and you get house guests you'll start to care.
Wake up, America.

Sorry, I like to consider all sources before forming an opinion. I don't just eat up what's spoon fed to me by the media and academia. You really should try thinking about stuff sometimes. It's kind of nice to be able to consider everything in the world before you decide which way you have to lean.
I'll take unofficial updates from real people over stuff broadcast on the "official news channels" any day. What's really neat about facebook is I can get realtime updates from all over the world before the government has a chance to spin the information.

I wasn't looking for any cases. This was posted on my facebook wall and I figured I'd share since it's on topic for the last few days.
By the way... the Zimmerman case is only one case too.

A black man was acquitted of shooting a white teen to death - in New York of all places! We've heard from several posters here that this "never happens" and/or the outcome would've been different if the races were switched and all the other hoopity whoopity Al Sharpton BS.

I'm expecting a full investigation by the DOJ and a public outcry from the NAACP to prohibit this man from ever defending himself again.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/07/tim-mcnabb/black-man-shoots-white-teen-jury-says-self-defense-and-nobody-cares/

Still wondering why black people want "extra evidence" included in trials. This will not end well. "So, Mr. Random Blackman, you knew crack was being sold in your neighborhood and the moment you got out of your vehicle you inteded to buy crack. Is that correct?"
Seems to me like black people would be fighting tooth and nail to make sure only actual physical evidence relevent to the case is allowed at trial.

About like saying someone is looking for trouble just because they have a gun.

About like saying someone is looking for trouble just because they have a gun.

About like saying someone is looking for trouble just because they have a gun.

About like saying someone is looking for trouble just because they have a gun.

What's sad is we can't just say, "Six people." We have to clarify what the racial makeup is. Why is that an issue?

What's sad is we can't just say, "Six people." We have to clarify what the racial makeup is. Why is that an issue?

Best post of the day.

This wasnt even a stand your ground case.
I cant believe how sheeple just gobble up whatever is spoon-fed to them by the media. Think, people! Do you really want less rights when it comes to self defense? Do you want it to be a law you cant fight back and have to rely on the government to keep you safe?
Come on!

Nope. Latino is white.
However, the media reported her as "black and Hispanic" so when I considered her race I did like most of America and just assumed that black with anything at all is black all the way. Don't believe me? Ask Tiger. Ask Kimora. Ask our president.
If you're still in awe of my genius, you can google the Headline News story on the jury's racial makeup.

Nope. Latino is white.
However, the media reported her as "black and Hispanic" so when I considered her race I did like most of America and just assumed that black with anything at all is black all the way. Don't believe me? Ask Tiger. Ask Kimora. Ask our president.
If you're still in awe of my genius, you can google the Headline News story on the jury's racial makeup.

Maybe that is what happened. I know a lot of people want to believe it. Even I, the crazy gun-nut, self defense-loving, conservative white guy don't count it out. It's completely possible.
However, there is ZERO evidence of that happening and since the only evidence available to the court was the injuries to GZ, the court was compelled to rule based on the evidence.
I had to explain this to a woman at work today. She, like most black people, felt Al Sharpton's summation of the possible events that could have maybe happened had to be considered by the court. She, like most black people, felt president Obama's heart-wrenching TV appeal to justice meant the court could trump it's blind justice policies and create evidence out of thin air that had to be considered. She, like most black people, is wrong.
I asked her what would happen if she went to buy some weed and the weed man's house got raided before she was able to complete the transaction. Would she hope the court convicts her because she got out of her car and went in to buy some weed? Or would she hope the justice system did it's job and considered the fact that there was no evidence of her committing a crime?
She, like most black people, was upset that I didn't believe the crime started the moment they got out of the car. Although, after explaining it to her in the context of another crime, she, UNlike most black people, admitted the escalation of force is where the self defense issues start. Not the car.
What's really ironic to me about this entire case is black people have a "Stop Snitching" policy and are pretty versed in courtroom drama. The typical black guy knows more about jury trials and evidence rules than a first-year college student. (Of any other color.) So you can imagine my surprise when they've asked the Attorney General to change the rules regarding evidence and championing the cause of convicting people based on public outcry instead of the facts of the case.
I don't know. I'm still scratching my head on this one. I want to say hats off though, Marvin. Like most black people, you're stuck in a room of white folks trying to explain to them why we're still sorting out our issues. Keep up the good work!
(By the way, I used to live at Scott Air Force Base and my buddies and I would sometimes go to "the white theater" over by Outback for movies and other times we'd head to "the black theater" near Olive Garden. They still doing that?)

Best post of the day.

Maybe that is what happened. I know a lot of people want to believe it. Even I, the crazy gun-nut, self defense-loving, conservative white guy don't count it out. It's completely possible.
However, there is ZERO evidence of that happening and since the only evidence available to the court was the injuries to GZ, the court was compelled to rule based on the evidence.
I had to explain this to a woman at work today. She, like most black people, felt Al Sharpton's summation of the possible events that could have maybe happened had to be considered by the court. She, like most black people, felt president Obama's heart-wrenching TV appeal to justice meant the court could trump it's blind justice policies and create evidence out of thin air that had to be considered. She, like most black people, is wrong.
I asked her what would happen if she went to buy some weed and the weed man's house got raided before she was able to complete the transaction. Would she hope the court convicts her because she got out of her car and went in to buy some weed? Or would she hope the justice system did it's job and considered the fact that there was no evidence of her committing a crime?
She, like most black people, was upset that I didn't believe the crime started the moment they got out of the car. Although, after explaining it to her in the context of another crime, she, UNlike most black people, admitted the escalation of force is where the self defense issues start. Not the car.
What's really ironic to me about this entire case is black people have a "Stop Snitching" policy and are pretty versed in courtroom drama. The typical black guy knows more about jury trials and evidence rules than a first-year college student. (Of any other color.) So you can imagine my surprise when they've asked the Attorney General to change the rules regarding evidence and championing the cause of convicting people based on public outcry instead of the facts of the case.
I don't know. I'm still scratching my head on this one. I want to say hats off though, Marvin. Like most black people, you're stuck in a room of white folks trying to explain to them why we're still sorting out our issues. Keep up the good work!
(By the way, I used to live at Scott Air Force Base and my buddies and I would sometimes go to "the white theater" over by Outback for movies and other times we'd head to "the black theater" near Olive Garden. They still doing that?)

Maybe that is what happened. I know a lot of people want to believe it. Even I, the crazy gun-nut, self defense-loving, conservative white guy don't count it out. It's completely possible.
However, there is ZERO evidence of that happening and since the only evidence available to the court was the injuries to GZ, the court was compelled to rule based on the evidence.
I had to explain this to a woman at work today. She, like most black people, felt Al Sharpton's summation of the possible events that could have maybe happened had to be considered by the court. She, like most black people, felt president Obama's heart-wrenching TV appeal to justice meant the court could trump it's blind justice policies and create evidence out of thin air that had to be considered. She, like most black people, is wrong.
I asked her what would happen if she went to buy some weed and the weed man's house got raided before she was able to complete the transaction. Would she hope the court convicts her because she got out of her car and went in to buy some weed? Or would she hope the justice system did it's job and considered the fact that there was no evidence of her committing a crime?
She, like most black people, was upset that I didn't believe the crime started the moment they got out of the car. Although, after explaining it to her in the context of another crime, she, UNlike most black people, admitted the escalation of force is where the self defense issues start. Not the car.
What's really ironic to me about this entire case is black people have a "Stop Snitching" policy and are pretty versed in courtroom drama. The typical black guy knows more about jury trials and evidence rules than a first-year college student. (Of any other color.) So you can imagine my surprise when they've asked the Attorney General to change the rules regarding evidence and championing the cause of convicting people based on public outcry instead of the facts of the case.
I don't know. I'm still scratching my head on this one. I want to say hats off though, Marvin. Like most black people, you're stuck in a room of white folks trying to explain to them why we're still sorting out our issues. Keep up the good work!
(By the way, I used to live at Scott Air Force Base and my buddies and I would sometimes go to "the white theater" over by Outback for movies and other times we'd head to "the black theater" near Olive Garden. They still doing that?)

Best post of the day.

Forced sterilization of anyone on the dole.

Pay disparity comes from type of work and negotiations. That's why men also make more than women. It isn't racist, it isn't sexist, it's simply an interaction between an employee and an employer.
If you want to talk about racist hiring policies, lets start with affirmative action. Folks are preferentially hired based on nothing more than the colorof their skin. You can't discriminate based on skin color but somehow it makes sense to give preference?
When you tell people they're inferior and need "extra" help to get hired, you've set the standard of inferiority for them. No wonder they have so much difficulty negotiating equal pay. Once again, you folks are "feeding the animals" and making them forget how to hunt.

If you dont like it, dont go on the dole. Thats a voluntary program by definition. 'merica, where you get to make choices and stuff.

Forced sterilization of anyone on the dole.