Raise a glass to George Zimmerman and the 2nd Amendment

  the right to bear arms shall not be infringed

a victory not for vigilantes but for ordinary decent folk trying to keep their neighbourhoods safe and having the necessary ''tools'' to do the job 

Let's see cigarettes kill folks every day, but white man profits off it it's all good. Blacks profit off weed and it's illegal and you go to jail

Haha do you ever sit back and read wtf you write. You're comparing slanging dope and selling cigarettes? McGuire and Bonds didn't go through the same sh*t?huh

it hasn't done anything for me. thank you for your post.

1) Cigarettes are legal
2) What?
3) Delores Tucker is black in case you didn't know
4) Are you wishing the jury had been different so the evidence would have been overlooked?

McGuire went thru what Bonds went thru by default. He had to be dealt with if they were gonna deal with Bonds. Im sorry, did Mark not play 16 years without it being an issue? And he was a poster boy for ROIDS. If Bonds doesn't put an assault on the records like he did, drugs would still be legal in baseball.

Not wishing the verdict would be different, because I do believe they got it right under the laws, and this has nothing to do with wanting someone to overlook evidence, because last I checked whites are human and can overlook evidence as well. My point is there's not a white person in America that would be comfortable with being judged by 5 blacks out of 6 jurors and it would never happen, so why should it be acceptable in reverse?

You keep crying about the jury makeup in more than one thread and I will say what I said in another thread,

The prosecution has just as much influence on who sits on the jury as the defense does. Quit blaming white people in general and blame the prosecution who couldn't make a decent case.

I'm not blaming white people for anything. I'm speaking on something that should be looked at in the system. Just like Zimmernman didn't just shoot Travon, there were events that lead up to him shooting. Well that's exactly how life works. We've done counseling groups and the first question we would ask " has anyone ever been the only ethnicity in a group. Meaning have you ever been the only hispanic person in a room of all white people or black etc. Mind you these are teenagers 13-17. Most minorities have experienced that while most whites had not. they are never the only white person anywhere unless they grew up in the inner cities. So white people don't tend to know the feeling and observation of being the only outcast. Well that leads up to life today. Where society sees no problem in having a jury make up of the one we just had. Believe me if that is acceptable and the norm, then one day if not already, someone will get an unfair trial and then there will be a problem. So why not nip it in the butt instead of waiting for it to happen? You are being plain stubborn if you can't see what I'm saying, and as far as the jury selection goes. I would assume there was only one or two token blacks to even select from. Why is it that you can get 5 white women jurors but not a single black woman juror? My guess would be that wasn't an option. 

I agree with you to a point-
However- I'm not sure you can ever really have a "jury of your peers"-

I find it a bit odd that there were no men on the jury- not exactly the same, but it would definitely give me pause to know my fate would be decided by an all female jury-
I accept its the system we currently have- but I've never really understood "jury of your peers"- which I consider a misnomer-

Seminole County residents are 78.6% white. Toss a black person(s) in there and things look awfully strange.

Los Angeles County pulled that stunt under the defense and the obscene verdict that followed will never be erased from the judicial system....especially in front of a worldwide audience.

Florida was not going down that road.

 

Zimmerman's suit against NBC for defamation will now proceed "ASAP"

Thanks for enlightening me Search because I didn't know, nor do I know exactly how the selection is made. My understanding is they take turns choosing who they want, but then they can oppose people you select. Can you please explain how the process is done. And another thing, the county is 78% but the jury was 83 %. What is strange if you throw a black person in there? Don't black people reside in that city? And what exactly is Florida saying about we're not going down that road? Blacks can't be trusted? I'm not being an behind, so please don't take anything the wrong way, just asking. 

Oh and per Dan Abrams "DOJ statement on zimmerman is political cover. There's no way they're going to charge him. Legal hurdles would be even higher."

the way jury selection works combined with what search presented about the demographic....a black juror was never going to see that jury..peremptorys would be used (if they werent actually...I admit I didn't follow the jury selection in the case)

A lawsuit should really be filed against the state for malicious prosecution.  The state attorney is a criminal. 

Yeah really, NBC doctors a tape and releases it and all the other outlets report on it saying Zimmerman is a "racist" and NBC says: all those other people were talking about it!!! as a defense.

So I'm trying to make sure I understand clearly. Black people can live in Seminole Country, but can't be jurors for trials in Seminole county?

When asked how the not-guilty verdict affects the civil case against NBC News, Beasley responded, “This verdict of not guilty is just that, and shows that at least this jury didn’t believe that George was a racist, profiling, or anything that the press accused George of being. That probably doesn’t get you that much but it’s simply time for us to start the case and hold accountable anyone who was irresponsible in their journalism.”

Well that's certainly not true.  The criminal case wasn't about whether George was a racist or a profiler.  Just ask O'Mara.  He's been stressing that the case wasn't about race.  It was a case about self-defense.  The jury might well have thought Zimmerman was a racist profiler, but believed he still acted in self defense, or at least that the state didn't meet its burden of proof.

I have a very hard time imagining a news organization losing a defamation suit in reporting on a criminal case.  I guess we'll see.

I think everyone should have a weapon on them, makes people think twice before being an idiot.

I posted the following in another thread and will do so in most of these George ZImmerman threads.