This is a kind of strange perspective to take, especially given that
video of the shooter taken a short time after this supposed assault shows the shooter completely unmarked. Nothing on his face, not limping, no marks, no grass stains, nothing. Surely if he were assaulted so fiercely that lethal force was appropriate, he would show some indication of having been in a fight, yes?
Besides which, the creepy thing is not the racial angle, but the legal one. The notion that I can shoot an unarmed person dead on a public street and not even get taken into custody? Please tell me how that is not insane. At the absolute minimum the police should have taken the shooter, relieved him of his weapon, and interviewed everyone within a hundred yards to get the clearest picture of what happened. None of that occurred. To fall back behind, "Well, the kid was a thug," is thoughtless, mindless.
As you are clearly demonstrating. Think about the implications of this over-broad, over-reaching "Stand Your Ground" law. It's not good. Try to stop reflexively reacting to the racial angle.
There's more to it. The "Stand Your Ground" law originated with
ALEC, a group which pushes a variety of far-right legal agendas. ALEC has been pushing various versions of "Stand Your Ground" in all 50 states, and this case marks a real setback. What to do? Ah yes, declare that the dead person was a thug who had it coming. That will work!
Re: This Person is a Member of the US House of Representatives
Originally Posted by Lemur
This is a kind of strange perspective to take, especially given that video of the shooter taken a short time after this supposed assault shows the shooter completely unmarked. Nothing on his face, not limping, no marks, no grass stains, nothing. Surely if he were assaulted so fiercely that lethal force was appropriate, he would show some indication of having been in a fight, yes?
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks