Enough of this "Self-Defense" nonsense crap!!

[Spicoli]

This one still sounds pretty cut & dry to me, no race or broad stereotypes on 'Merica need apply. This was an insecure idiot who forgot he had options, and that other people unfortunatly have the right to be assholes. It happens every single day no matter your country...the naked ape pounding his chest and puffing up and its clear this guy has been full of contradictions. We've all learned at least one time...you can always escalate a situation, but once your are there its a fast blurry ride back down. Put your pride in your pocket, rise above, stfu and drive on. That is much easier and desired in hindsight.

[TitoFan]

Mistrial Declared on Murder Charge in Loud-Music Trial - NBC News



Mistrial on the 1st-degree murder charge. What a sham.

Oh well.... 60 years is still pretty much equivalent to life. The guy needs to be put away for good. Rarely have I seen a criminal who, by just looking at his picture in the press..... makes me want to beat his face to a bloody pulp.

Hopefully he'll get gang-raped in prison.

[Beanflicker]

The guy's 47, they can give him 60 years or 600 years, doesn't matter, he's going to spend the rest of his life behind bars is the bottom line.

I can't say I disagree with this one. Zimmerman had a guy on top of him smashing his head in. This guy fired blindly and recklessly into a vehicle because he thought he might have saw a weapon. He belongs in jail.

[TitoFan]

He belongs in jail where I hope he rots.... or someone beats him to death.

But beyond that..... If his sentencing helps to make even one trigger-happy, Neanderthal, macho moron think twice before emptying his gun at someone just 'cause they "pissed him off".... it will have served its purpose.

[Spicoli]

They got it right. This guy belongs behind bars. Orders a fooking pizza and drinks wine after spraying a car ffs. Just another day in the lbc

[Beanflicker]

But beyond that..... If his sentencing helps to make even one trigger-happy, Neanderthal, macho moron think twice before emptying his gun at someone just 'cause they "pissed him off".... it will have served its purpose.

They've got to impliment some kind of course that's mandatory to complete if you want to get a carrying permit. Something that will really nail home the law and when exactly you can use deadly force to defend yourself, and the consequences of not adhering to these laws.

Not that it would totally eliminate trigger-happy vigilantes, but there seems to be a lot of confusement from the general public about what constitutes self defense. If you're going to carry around a gun like a cop, you should have to know just as much as a cop about the laws applicable to carrying a concealed weapon.

I agree that this is a good verdict to hopefully deter the trigger happy. Here you have a middle aged white guy who's never been in trouble in his life, now he's going to jail for life for gunning down a black youth. There's going to be a lot of angry black inmates who are going to want a piece of his ass.

[FinitoElDinamita]

Thats why just carry a burner with a wrapped handle and u can get away clean..

[FinitoElDinamita]

Finito, you know men can jump to conclusions too, you have been in touch with your famine side quite a few times.

for example?

Would you prefer them in alphabetical? or chronological order?

Obviously meant feminine side, bloody tablet trying to correct what I type.

LOL.... no worries, M. We both know what you meant.

So Finito..... would like an Excel spreadsheet with that?

Ur just gonna twist things around and make up lies..

I do have a soft side but who says pretty boys cant get wild homey.

[El Kabong]

If his sentencing helps to make even one trigger-happy, Neanderthal, macho moron think twice before emptying his gun at someone just 'cause they "pissed him off".... it will have served its purpose.

Yup, that's totally what anyone and everyone who owns a gun is. And I for one am quite pleased you who enjoy being "politically correct" can stereotype and berate people who are for the overwhelming part are PEACEFULLY exercising their Constitutional right.

[Beanflicker]

Yup, that's totally what anyone and everyone who owns a gun is. And I for one am quite pleased you who enjoy being "politically correct" can stereotype and berate people who are for the overwhelming part are PEACEFULLY exercising their Constitutional right.

That's true too, it's easy to get bent out of shape over isolated incidents but the reality is this kind of thing is very rare/unlikely when you compare the number of incidents to the number of people legally carrying a gun in the States. At the end of the day, unless you're a complete psychopath, shooting someone is an undesirable act: if not morally, than for the knowledge of the headache that it's going to cause you trying to prove that it was justified and staying out of jail, possible negative press, revenge from family/friends/vigilantes/ect. It's going to be a nightmare whether it was justified or not.

I think there still needs to be more education done on what constitutes self defense though. I think the Zimmerman trial proved that, because the majority of people believe that Treyvon had a right to attack Zimmerman because George was following him.

And FOR SURE I don't think people should be allowed to carry while under the influence of alcohol.

[imp]

What are your thoughts in the jurys ethnicity?

Should all jurys consist of an equal mixture of each race?

[Beanflicker]

I think you have to go mixed in these kinds of cases, I don't think it necessarily has to be equal but each race should be represented. Look what happened with OJ - guilty beyond any reasonable doubt, piles of evidence against him, complete clear cut case… and he gets off because they proved to an almost all black jury that one of the detectives said "nigger" and expressed racist thoughts in an interview years prior, and therefore probably planted the evidence.

Race is a big thing, as much as we want to downplay it. There were only 3 black people on this jury (out of 15 or 16 people) and they still sent this guy away. That innate resentment in black people from the many years of being treated like shit by whitey can be manipulated.

[imp]

I think you have to go mixed in these kinds of cases, I don't think it necessarily has to be equal but each race should be represented. Look what happened with OJ - guilty beyond any reasonable doubt, piles of evidence against him, complete clear cut case… and he gets off because they proved to an almost all black jury that one of the detectives said "nigger" and expressed racist thoughts in an interview years prior, and therefore probably planted the evidence.

Race is a big thing, as much as we want to downplay it. There were only 3 black people on this jury (out of 15 or 16 people) and they still sent this guy away. That innate resentment in black people from the many years of being treated like shit by whitey can be manipulated.

Oj is one pin in a haystack to other thousand of other non-black right/wrong cases.

Its just an idea.

A chinese guy kills an indian, lets make the jury x 2 chinese, x2 indian, x2 white, x2 black.

Its just a thought as to how and why the jury is sometimes selected that way.

I think it should always be the best person for the job regardless of race, BUT why not make it all equal.

Makes sense

[walrus]

Blacks do look at the judicial system differently from whites. Whites tend to be a little more trusting in the process. I'm not saying it's wrong or right I would have a hard time convicting someone as I have deep distrust and contempt for the law. I am white so I'm not saying all whites are trusting in the system, just speaking in general terms.

[Beanflicker]

Oj is one pin in a haystack to other thousand of other non-black right/wrong cases.

Its just an idea.

A chinese guy kills an indian, lets make the jury x 2 chinese, x2 indian, x2 white, x2 black.

Its just a thought as to how and why the jury is sometimes selected that way.

I think it should always be the best person for the job regardless of race, BUT why not make it all equal.

Makes sense

Well it's tough to be 100% equal in terms of race because there are always tons of other factors that go into jury selection. It's a long process where each side is objecting and making concessions in terms of the jury selection, and race is usually very low on the priority list.

Take this case: it wasn't a matter of grabbing 7 whites and 7 blacks. The lawyers were more interested in how each member of the jury felt about gun laws - the logic being that someone who is 100% against firearms and possession laws would be much less likely to give this guy a fair shake than the average black guy who moderately pro-gun.

There have been cases where the potential jurors had to fill out questionaires upwards of 200 pages to determine if they were eligible. There are companies that specialize in jury selection and sell their expertise for a pretty penny. Its a complicated matter, not simply a matter of making sure there were an equal number of each race represented.