Papist Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 [quote name='Adrestia' timestamp='1334338958' post='2417095'] Are you talking about the media jumping on certain stories for profit? Or do you mean the actual protest(s)? If you mean the protest, which one(s)? [/quote] The media is always going to go for whatever gets them watched/read. And not the protests per se, but the "leaders" such as Jackson and Sharpton. I seriously doubt these two guys are interested in justice.They are professional protesters/agitators that use opportunities such has this to gain/keep their supporters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrestia Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 [quote name='Papist' timestamp='1334339394' post='2417097'] The media is always going to go for whatever gets them watched/read. And not the protests per se, but the "leaders" such as Jackson and Sharpton. I seriously doubt these two guys are interested in justice.They are professional protesters/agitators that use opportunities such has this to gain/keep their supporters. [/quote] Ah. Now I understand what you meant. I think of Jackson & Sharpton in the same light as Ann Coulter & Bill O'Reilly. They started out as good people with good intentions, then people started listening to them, they developed an amount of influence and power - which became a source of profit, then the people around them stopped challenging them and holding them as accountable when they went a bit too far. I occasionally see glimpses of old Coulter & old O'Reilly in their current stuff, but it's rare. Like Jackson & Sharpton, they have agendas, and sometimes lose sight of the forest for the trees. I don't think their goal has changed in their minds, I just think they have become less grounded. Just my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papist Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 [quote name='Adrestia' timestamp='1334340149' post='2417110'] Ah. Now I understand what you meant. I think of Jackson & Sharpton in the same light as Ann Coulter & Bill O'Reilly. They started out as good people with good intentions, then people started listening to them, they developed an amount of influence and power - which became a source of profit, then the people around them stopped challenging them and holding them as accountable when they went a bit too far. I occasionally see glimpses of old Coulter & old O'Reilly in their current stuff, but it's rare. Like Jackson & Sharpton, they have agendas, and sometimes lose sight of the forest for the trees. I don't think their goal has changed in their minds, I just think they have become less grounded. Just my opinion. [/quote] I can't speak to Coulter or OReilly b/c I don't get the FNC nor them on radio, if they are on radio. Not that I'd watch/listen to them if I did. They are FNC are like all the others. But I do know that I do not see Coulter's or OReilly's mugs on TV spearheading these public outrages. People assume that b/c I am a right-thinking person that I like/support FNC/Coulter/OReilly/Hannity/Rush/etc. That is not the case at all. Hannity I have NO respect for, especially as a Catholic. He just is a political right robot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrestia Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 Maybe Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh would have been better examples than O'Reilly (in terms of spearheading public outrage). I do see the products of their work in the community. In my opinion, the right wing and the left wing are attached to the same bird, and they feed off each other for profit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anomaly Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 [quote name='Adrestia' timestamp='1334341661' post='2417151'] In my opinion, the right wing and the left wing are attached to the same bird, and they feed off each other for profit. [/quote]If that's your original phrase, you should get royalties. I'm so using it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrestia Posted April 13, 2012 Share Posted April 13, 2012 [quote name='Anomaly' timestamp='1334345225' post='2417222'] If that's your original phrase, you should get royalties. I'm so using it. [/quote]I'm not that creative, but I can't for the life of me remember when or where I heard it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 And the truth comes to light... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossCuT Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 I noticed a story that came out Sept 13th where the medical examiner claimed the wounds on Trayvon Martin were due to gun shots entering through his back. This means it was not "Stand your ground"...Trayvon was murdered. Not only that but Mr. Zimmerman has quite a building record for gun violence. He recently threatened his new pregnant girlfriend with a gun. He is a violent, disturbed man. I do not believe he deserves to have a gun anymore, its not safe for anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotreDame Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 Zimmerman has lived under months of death threats, he's had the president of the most powerful country in the world single him out as a murderer, he's had the US Attorney general recently threaten to bring him up on civil rights charges. He can't work because nobody will employ him. He has to be careful about going in public. Given the death threats I'm not surprised he keeps a gun around him. It has to be very difficult for him. I'm not surprised he is cracking under the pressure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossCuT Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 He killed a boy in cold blood, he should have thought about what he was doing before he got out of his car, chased a boy down, and used lethal force. If you own a gun and take pride in using it, you need to man up deal with what happens when it kills someone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotreDame Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 He killed a boy in cold blood, he should have thought about what he was doing before he got out of his car, chased a boy down, and used lethal force. None of the evidence points to that and a jury didn't find him guilty of that. The legal scholars who have commented on the case have said that it only even went to trial due to prosecutorial misconduct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossCuT Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 Regardless of all that, a boy still died as a result. Peoples lives shouldnt be taken so lightly. If you own a gun you need to be responsible because it is a weapon capable of taking life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhuturePriest Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 (edited) He killed a boy in cold blood, he should have thought about what he was doing before he got out of his car, chased a boy down, and used lethal force. If you own a gun and take pride in using it, you need to man up deal with what happens when it kills someone. "Chased a boy down" sounds like he started running him down and shot him when he got up close. Not even the most radical leaders of the anti-Zimmerman cause have ever claimed this. I think that emotions run very high on both sides of the issue, and right now we need a lot less emotion and a lot more logic and clear thought. I'm not saying he is or isn't guilty; I am saying that people are too emotional to think clearly on the issue, and that means on both sides of the political spectrum. I am sick and tired of people on the left screaming racism and bloody murder, and I'm tired of people on the right screaming stand your ground laws. People in America need to stop being emotional basket cases and start thinking clearly. Edited November 19, 2013 by FuturePriest387 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossCuT Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 Youre right FP, its just hard because a boy lost his life over this ish. Thats why Im emotional about it. :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhuturePriest Posted November 19, 2013 Share Posted November 19, 2013 Youre right FP, its just hard because a boy lost his life over this ish. Thats why Im emotional about it. :( I understand completely. I wish nobody had died, regardless of age. I'm not convinced of either side so far, to be honest. Zimmerman was in the wrong for following him. I also don't approve that he followed him simply because he was black. However, according to his tweets, Trayvon wasn't exactly the peaceful angel the media has portrayed him to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now