Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You inferred he should not be dismissed as past convictions might need to be reviewed than. I'm against correlating whether or not he should be removed now, over fear of causing other convictions to require review. In other words, that fear would not alter the present decision.
Is that not what some have been screaming about on here for weeks?
What, that whites face racism and systemic bias? I didn't see anyone screaming about that here. Link?
Quote:
Or are you really going to stand by that statement? If so, then you have no authority to speak on the topic of racism, assuming you are "wihte."
Yes, of course I stand by what I wrote. Put another way, until judges, juries and prosecutors are replaced by robots and computers, you have to accept that all parties involved are going to bring their life experiences into their decision making.
That's reality, the system, and life. We all deal with it.
You inferred he should not be dismissed as past convictions might need to be reviewed than. I'm against correlating whether or not he should be removed now, over fear of causing other convictions to require review. In other words, that fear would not alter the present decision.
So... you're saying that he has been able to judge black men in the past, as well as whites and other races fairly?
So... you're saying that he has been able to judge black men in the past, as well as whites and other races fairly?
I'm not saying that. I'm saying if they were to remove him, but decided not to, as it would jeopardize past convictions, that would be morally bankrupt. The moral position would be to remove him, if one thought in this case that to be correct, even if past convictions were put at risk.
I'm not saying that. I'm saying if they were to remove him, but decided not to, as it would jeopardize past convictions, that would be morally bankrupt. The moral position would be to remove him, if one thought in this case that to be correct, even if past convictions were put at risk.
Unless the prosecutor has shown a past history of bias, then it's morally bankrupt to force his removal after 24 years of career history.
This is ridiculous on it's face, this is about finding any reason to try to obtain a conviction and removing any obstacle to mob justice via manipulation of the legal system.
What, that whites face racism and systemic bias? I didn't see anyone screaming about that here. Link?
Your here enough know what I'm talking about.
Yes, of course I stand by what I wrote. Put another way, until judges, juries and prosecutors are replaced by robots and computers, you have to accept that all parties involved are going to bring their life experiences into their decision making.
That's reality, the system, and life. We all deal with it.
Not the same situation at all. Hence how the governor has acted.
The next time there are serious protests over Police misconduct/excessive force/brutality, protesters should be armed in Open Carry protest so that the protests are respected by all parties.
Clearly some people didn't get the memo that we are serious about the issue and won't be quiet about it any longer.
The next time there are serious protests over Police misconduct/excessive force/brutality, protesters should be armed in Open Carry protest so that the protests are respected by all parties.
You won't get any argument from me on the right to open carry or conceal carry. My only stipulation would be that the person carrying is legally able to do so. Felons need not apply.
Quote:
Clearly some people didn't get the memo that we are serious about the issue and won't be quiet about it any longer.
You won't get any argument from me on the right to open carry or conceal carry. My only stipulation would be that the person carrying is legally able to do so. Felons need not apply.
"We"? Who's "we"?
The same people telling you about this issue for years while people mocked.
Felons won't need to apply. What that class needs is a gang truce. They wouldn't be protesting anyway.
AA's have to get serious about our issues and start to get more representatives in our local, state and federal governments.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
huh?