Tyler Perry: What fucking mistake? It's not my fault you have absolutely no concept of nuance.
Sigh. I suppose I should not be surprised. I said-
So you think that Martin was right to fear for his life but he was wrong to fear for his life.
Fearing for one's life is not the same as being in literal danger.
What "other neighborhood watch case"? Most neighborhood watchmen don't follow people around in their cars.
Some do some don't. A car is as good a place as any to watch a neighborhood. It is mobile and can be set up anywhere and the presence of a car does not draw much attention.
You are at least insinuating here that everyone who is concerned for their safety is going to run away, which is certainly not the case.
If you are truly afraid you are either going to fight or run, not change your mind half way through.
Just reading your posts, you betray a need to condemn Trayvon and defend his killer. I will tell you right now, if someone was following me home, harassing me, yelling at me "what are you doing" I would be fucking pissed, really pissed, and If I were 17 I might be stupid enough to act on it, the thought of "maybe this guy is one of those gun nuts" would never have crossed my mind. If Zimmerman is proven to have followed trayvon, I think its 100% certain (i obviously cant PROVE this but it just makes sense) that he was saying something at the time, and if Martin did get angry enough to go smack his dumbass in the mouth, I would say he deserved it. You dont just follow people because you think they are suspicious, you call the police if you really think they are out to do harm, even then I say give people the benefit of trhe doubt. And before you call me a hypocrite on that last bit, I want to say that no, I dont give lunatics like z the benefit of the doubt
Archroy: with your mass shootings, overzealous police officers, lack of decent public health care and twitchy neibourhood watch.
What part of the US is this? Seriously, I'd like to know so I can avoid it next time I travel inside my own country.
We have a group shooting (to varying degrees) every 6 months in this country almost like clockwork. It happens so frequently in this country that its almost come to the point where people just sort of yawn and go "whatever, What is Kim's kardashian ass doing?"
Just because the a huge number of people support something doesnt make it rightt, please refrain from using tht silly argument. Hitler was pretty popular at the time Ill have you know.
Also, no its not good enough. The 2nd amendment was created during a time of turbulence and insecurity, and also when concealed weapons for the most part didnt exist, and you couldnt fire 12 rounds from one clip. You had to carry a little bag of gunpowder around, and a tamper, a fuse and pungi sticks. Its not the same. I think its the one amendment they didnt really think about in terms of america in the future. With all of out other constitutional rights being stripped away, why is this one RETARDED one being defended with such fervor? Why dont you care about the plethora of rights that weve burned on the altar of retarded wars in the middle east? But dont worry, i guarantee you you will be playing Call of duty:IRAN Warfare in 2016, based on true events. The U.S. is unbearable in its warmongering stupidity, arrogance
Stilt: The 2nd amendment was created during a time of turbulence and insecurity, and also when concealed weapons for the most part didnt exist, and you couldnt fire 12 rounds from one clip. You had to carry a little bag of gunpowder around, and a tamper, a fuse and pungi sticks. Its not the same. I think its the one amendment they didnt really think about in terms of america in the future.
That old meme? Really?
*Cough*
*Shuffles papers around*
Ah, here we are.
*Ahem*
"Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivolous, that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment . We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications, e.g., Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U. S. 844, 849 (1997) , and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search, e.g., Kyllo v. United States, 533 U. S. 27, 35-36 (2001) , the Second Amendment extends, prima facie,to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding."
With all of out other constitutional rights being stripped away, why is this one RETARDED one being defended with such fervor? Why dont you care about the plethora of rights that weve burned on the altar of retarded wars in the middle east?
>Assuming we don't care about other Constitutional rights
Blablahb, I don't think you could miss the point harder if you tried.
Stilt: The 2nd amendment was created during a time of turbulence and insecurity, and also when concealed weapons for the most part didnt exist, and you couldnt fire 12 rounds from one clip. You had to carry a little bag of gunpowder around, and a tamper, a fuse and pungi sticks. Its not the same. I think its the one amendment they didnt really think about in terms of america in the future.
That old meme? Really?
*Cough*
*Shuffles papers around*
Ah, here we are.
*Ahem*
"Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivolous, that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment . We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications, e.g., Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U. S. 844, 849 (1997) , and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search, e.g., Kyllo v. United States, 533 U. S. 27, 35-36 (2001) , the Second Amendment extends, prima facie,to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding."
With all of out other constitutional rights being stripped away, why is this one RETARDED one being defended with such fervor? Why dont you care about the plethora of rights that weve burned on the altar of retarded wars in the middle east?
>Assuming we don't care about other Constitutional rights
Blablahb, I don't think you could miss the point harder if you tried.
Im not blahblahb, its bullshit that I have to say it, but Im putting an end to it here and now. From now on Im reporting anyone who calls me blahblab
I dont see any NRA guys lamenting the death of our other rights, especially since the 2nd amendment is perhaps the most protected right in America and will never die because of the huge population of paranoid, beer hat wearing, wifebeating racists in the country. And I will bet any amount of money that yes, gun owners are much more likely to be racist hicks
Stilt: Im not blahblahb, its bullshit that I have to say it, but Im putting an end to it here and now. From now on Im reporting anyone who calls me blahblab
We're going to need proof you're not. Until then you will continue to be addressed as such.
Stilt: The 2nd amendment was created during a time of turbulence and insecurity, and also when concealed weapons for the most part didnt exist, and you couldnt fire 12 rounds from one clip. You had to carry a little bag of gunpowder around, and a tamper, a fuse and pungi sticks. Its not the same. I think its the one amendment they didnt really think about in terms of america in the future.
That old meme? Really?
*Cough*
*Shuffles papers around*
Ah, here we are.
*Ahem*
"Some have made the argument, bordering on the frivolous, that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by the Second Amendment . We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications, e.g., Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U. S. 844, 849 (1997) , and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search, e.g., Kyllo v. United States, 533 U. S. 27, 35-36 (2001) , the Second Amendment extends, prima facie,to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding."
With all of out other constitutional rights being stripped away, why is this one RETARDED one being defended with such fervor? Why dont you care about the plethora of rights that weve burned on the altar of retarded wars in the middle east?
>Assuming we don't care about other Constitutional rights
Blablahb, I don't think you could miss the point harder if you tried.
Im not blahblahb, its bullshit that I have to say it, but Im putting an end to it here and now. From now on Im reporting anyone who calls me blahblab
Yeah, sorry. Don't buy it for some reason. And even if you're not him, I think we should dub you "Blablahb Two: Electric Boogaloo"
Anyways, care to address anything I added in my previous posts?
Archroy: Of course it's fucking relevant. The only place I've personally seen an armed officer away from an airport was outside the US embassy in London. Other than that, there are armed response vehicles that are called to scenes where guns are involved The vast majority of coppers aren't tooled up because they don't need to be.
The phrase out of sight, out of mind describes you to the t. As those articles I posted showed the police in the UK are getting more and more armed BUT they want to keep up the facade of being unarmed. Typical.
And I never claimed that the UK was a "gun free paradise"
But the previous poster was. You know the guy I was talking to before. Plus I thought you already established that you were not an anti. Was I wrong?
although compared to the US it is pretty paradisiacal and lacking in guns.
And guess what it is not. There is far more violence in the UK than there is in Switzerland or in any of the cities I have lived in. Violence is commonplace. Did you see that part in the first article where half of that one police union (40,000 people total) claimed to have been in fear for their lives in the past 3 years?
Tyler Perry: Because everybody lives 75 miles from each other.
Uh no. The population density is about 20 people per square mile. That statement is a cop out and you know it. People are arguing that the presence of guns equals the presence of homicide and Idaho proves they are wrong. Hell, Switzerland does the job as well but people get pissy when I mention that country.
Tyler Perry: I would tend to disagree with that notion.
I see plenty of toleration in the south but intolerance in the north and west. Every area is different. In my home town the KKK was completely ostracized and more than a few whites (including my family) got threatened for it. Hell, even before the civil rights movement when my great-grandfather opened his hardware store he never barred anyone. Same happened in all the stores on main street (at least according to the local museum). If you want to know why guns are so important try living with the knowledge that there is an army of racist cocksuckers gunning for you.
Archroy: Of course it's fucking relevant. The only place I've personally seen an armed officer away from an airport was outside the US embassy in London. Other than that, there are armed response vehicles that are called to scenes where guns are involved The vast majority of coppers aren't tooled up because they don't need to be.
The phrase out of sight, out of mind describes you to the t. As those articles I posted showed the police in the UK are getting more and more armed BUT they want to keep up the facade of being unarmed. Typical.
And I never claimed that the UK was a "gun free paradise"
But the previous poster was. You know the guy I was talking to before. Plus I thought you already established that you were not an anti. Was I wrong?
although compared to the US it is pretty paradisiacal and lacking in guns.
And guess what it is not. There is far more violence in the UK than there is in Switzerland or in any of the cities I have lived in. Violence is commonplace. Did you see that part in the first article where half of that one police union (40,000 people total) claimed to have been in fear for their lives in the past 3 years?
I never said it was a gun free paradise? I defy you to find one post with the words "gun free paradise" or its equivalent in anyone of my posts, save this one
According to the girlfriend he said it not yelled it and only after Martin began the conversation.
I would be fucking pissed, really pissed, and If I were 17 I might be stupid enough to act on it
So you are saying that you think it very possible that Martin decided to confront Zimmerman head on.
If Zimmerman is proven to have followed trayvon, I think its 100% certain (i obviously cant PROVE this but it just makes sense) that he was saying something at the time, and if Martin did get angry enough to go smack his dumbass in the mouth, I would say he deserved it.
So you are advocating violence as a way to solve local disputes. Admittedly we have a bit of that in bars but we always come to an understanding. It is sort of an impromptu duel. That is very different from just attacking someone.
Stilt: Just because the a huge number of people support something doesnt make it rightt, please refrain from using tht silly argument. Hitler was pretty popular at the time Ill have you know.
Wow, I am surprised it took almost a thousand posts for Godwin's Law to come into effect.
Anyway, this is a Democratic Republic. That means general rule by the majority. Antis use their money to push through laws while the NRA uses people. Which is more true to the spirit of democracy?
The 2nd amendment was created during a time of turbulence and insecurity
That is the definition of human history.
also when concealed weapons for the most part didnt exist
They existed and in large numbers.
Spoiler: Click to ViewPHA+PGltZyBzcmM9Imh0dHA6Ly9jYWNoZS53aXN0cy5jb20vdGh1bWJuYWlscy83LzBiLzcwYmYxYmFjMjVmM2I5N2MwZDZmZWZkZGJlNTk1OGI4LW9yaWciIGFsdD0iaW1hZ2UiLz48L3A+
you couldnt fire 12 rounds from one clip.
What you mean from this-
Sorry couldn't resist. The term you are looking for is magazine. Also (invented in 1718)-
With all of out other constitutional rights being stripped away, why is this one RETARDED one being defended with such fervor? Why dont you care about the plethora of rights that weve burned on the altar of retarded wars in the middle east?
Our rights were stripped long before Bush (hell even Bush Sr.) was in office. In fact many in my group are fighting to get those rights back. Luckily the second amendment has a good and powerful organization behind it (unlike most of the other amendments, most of which are in total defended by the ACLU). Americans are getting their second Amendment rights back a little at a time and I can only hope that our other Amendments get as good (if not a better) a defender as the NRA.
BTW it is the 2nd Amendment that gives the other amendments their teeth-
The U.S. is unbearable in its warmongering stupidity, arrogance
Tyler Perry: Because everybody lives 75 miles from each other.
Uh no. The population density is about 20 people per square mile. That statement is a cop out and you know it. People are arguing that the presence of guns equals the presence of homicide and Idaho proves they are wrong. Hell, Switzerland does the job as well but people get pissy when I mention that country.
Tyler Perry: I would tend to disagree with that notion.
I see plenty of toleration in the south but intolerance in the north and west. Every area is different. In my home town the KKK was completely ostracized and more than a few whites (including my family) got threatened for it. Hell, even before the civil rights movement when my great-grandfather opened his hardware store he never barred anyone. Same happened in all the stores on main street (at least according to the local museum). If you want to know why guns are so important try living with the knowledge that there is an army of racist cocksuckers gunning for you.
I dont believe that for a second, and even if this alleged army of armed white haters existed where you live, why not fuckin move! Go to idaho, your shining beacon of gun paradise where everyone owns a gun but never shoots anyone!
The U.S. is unbearable in its warmongering stupidity, arrogance
Blablahb is that you? Your holiness has returned.
Ive noticed everytime you call me blahblab, you're basically conceding to my point. I read it as "Yea we are arrgoant and we do get into stupid wars, but who cares were 'merica we can do whatever the fuck we want YAHOO BANG BANG BANG"
Tyler Perry: Because everybody lives 75 miles from each other.
Uh no. The population density is about 20 people per square mile. That statement is a cop out and you know it. People are arguing that the presence of guns equals the presence of homicide and Idaho proves they are wrong. Hell, Switzerland does the job as well but people get pissy when I mention that country.
Jesus Christ on a cracker, it was blatantly obvious hyperbole. Unclench.
I would say homicide rates are lower in gun-friendly states like Idaho because those states are not very urbanized.
However, Alaska (60.6% gun ownership) has the third-highest rate of gun deaths in the country (17.62 per 10,000).
Stilt: I dont believe that for a second, and even if this alleged army of armed white haters existed where you live, why not fuckin move!
Because my family owns several hundred acres of land in that area and several pieces of property including (at the time) a hospital, a hardware store, a mortuary, and a house in town. My Great-Grandfather was the town secretary and my family has been in that town for the past 190 YEARS (in case you cannot do that math that means my family was in that part of Texas prior to it gaining its freedom from Mexico). Would you leave?
Odd statement to make considering it was my first time.
you're basically conceding to my point. I read it as "Yea we are arrgoant and we do get into stupid wars, but who cares were 'merica we can do whatever the fuck we want YAHOO BANG BANG BANG"
Tyler Perry: Jesus Christ on a cracker, it was blatantly obvious hyperbole. Unclench.
I was aware but I was not going to let the statement stand.
I would say homicide rates are lower in gun-friendly states like Idaho because those states are not very urbanized.
In other words socioeconomic-cultural conditions are the reason for high and low murder rates and not the presence of a gun.
BTW the more urbanized the area, usually, the lower the gun ownership rate.
However, Alaska (60.6% gun ownership) has the third-highest rate of gun deaths in the country (17.62 per 10,000).
The number of gun deaths is irrelevant to the discussion. There were only 22 murders in Alaska in total (31 in 2010) for a murder rate hovering around 3-4 per 100,000 (due to the small population just one murder more or less can change the entire statistic). http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/data/table_05.html. Simply showing the how many deaths were by firearms is plain dishonest because it also includes suicides. Suicides are high in Alaska due to the conditions. The presence of guns is irrelevant in comparison to that.
BTW you know what state has the highest number of gun deaths in the country? The District of Columbia (effectively can be considered its own state).
farson135: Simply showing the how many deaths were by firearms is plain dishonest because it also includes suicides. Suicides are high in Alaska due to the conditions. The presence of guns is irrelevant in comparison to that.
I SAID that "not all gun deaths are homicides." Don't even attempt to admonish me for being "dishonest" when I fucking put that disclaimer at the end of my post.
The phrase out of sight, out of mind describes you to the t. As those articles I posted showed the police in the UK are getting more and more armed BUT they want to keep up the facade of being unarmed. Typical.
Do you realise that there is a difference between actual facts and the shit that you just fabricate from whole cloth?
But the previous poster was. You know the guy I was talking to before. Plus I thought you already established that you were not an anti. Was I wrong?
I don't want to disarm you. It's your country, so do what you like. I wouldn't want the UK to have similar laws however. I am anti idiots and teeth-grinding rage monkeys with guns and there are an awful lot of those fuckers out there.
And guess what it is not. There is far more violence in the UK than there is in Switzerland or in any of the cities I have lived in. Violence is commonplace
My bold. I'm going to take a leaf out of your book here. PROVE IT OR SHUT UP! Nah, I can't do it. Just typing that out made me feel like a prize dick. Is that what you feel like all the time?
If violence was commonplace, I'd see it a lot more than I do, which is almost never. 95% of the violence I've seen is pissed up idiots scuffling outside pubs and clubs at kicking out time. I've seen a grand total of one violent attack during the day in my entire life. Twenty years ago. Commonplace my lily-white arse.
And you do realise that Switzerland is a fucking weird place don't you? I'd sooner live in the US than there. Here's a couple of examples of what a fine, progressive country they are.
Did you see that part in the first article where half of that one police union (40,000 people total) claimed to have been in fear for their lives in the past 3 years?
Did you see the part that said:
"The Police Federation, which represents rank-and-file officers, called for a 5% increase in the number authorised to use guns. However, when it surveyed 47,328 members, 82% said they did not want officers to be routinely armed on duty"?
Tyler Perry: I SAID that "not all gun deaths are homicides." Don't even attempt to admonish me for being "dishonest" when I fucking put that disclaimer at the end of my post.
Which was added AFTER I posted (you do realize that I quoted directly from you and it wasn't there). It is still dishonest because that kind of statistic preys on the ignorant. It is not surprising that it comes from the VPC.
One day the mods are going to get you if you don't tidy up your posts.
Do you realise that there is a difference between actual facts and the shit that you just fabricate from whole cloth?
Why don't you back that statement.
If violence was commonplace, I'd see it a lot more than I do, which is almost never. 95% of the violence I've seen is pissed up idiots scuffling outside pubs and clubs at kicking out time. I've seen a grand total of one violent attack during the day in my entire life. Twenty years ago. Commonplace my lily-white arse.
So you yourself have seen multiple acts of violence but you claim that violence is not commonplace. Fighting is violence. If you have seen multiple acts of violence yourself (and you have not been deliberately putting yourself in that position) then you have no room to talk.
And you do realise that Switzerland is a fucking weird place don't you? I'd sooner live in the US than there. Here's a couple of examples of what a fine, progressive country they are.
Your point? All places are weird in their own way. I would never live in England because human rights seem to be an afterthought. At least here in the US we try maintain our rights.
Did you see the part that said:
"The Police Federation, which represents rank-and-file officers, called for a 5% increase in the number authorised to use guns. However, when it surveyed 47,328 members, 82% said they did not want officers to be routinely armed on duty"?
Archroy: That's nice for you. For my part, nothing short of the entire nuclear annihilation of Western Europe could induce me to move to the US, with your mass shootings, overzealous police officers, lack of decent public health care and twitchy neighbourhood watch.
Cry me a river. Any one of those mass shootings could have been prevented if a single person present had been allowed to carry a weapon and use it. (And honestly, quite a few of those mass shootings could have been prevented if we had actually profiled dangerous people like Nidal Malik Hasan, Cho Seung-Hui, and Jared Loughner. All chose venues where they knew the majority of the citizens would be unarmed.) In a country of 300 million people, that ain't bad. I'd rather live in an actual affluent country that occasionally had a mass shooting than a run-down police state managed by poofters with cameras everywhere that gives you 56 days in jail for tweeting mean things and no real job prospects for anything but government work.
Besides, it looks like Anders Behring Brevik beat everyone in the US on that whole "mass shooting" thing. Stay classy, Western Europe!
Also please note that Vdare's Immigrant Mass Murder Syndrome is a handy explanation for a large number of these attacks. Though...a caveat...they are Enoch Powell fans over there, so I guess that makes them inadmissible as evidence.
-- In November 2009, U.S. army psychologist Major Nidal Hasan opened fire at a military base in Fort Hood, Texas, leaving 13 dead and 42 others wounded.
The above was an act of terrorism. And also evidence of how bugfuck insane our current weapons policy on military bases is. If a soldier wants to get ahold of a weapon they damn well will, banning soldiers from carrying sidearms on the base is fucking STUPID
feekmatic: Let me enlighten you! What the Black Panthers did was against the law! And what Spike Lee did was against the law! And what President Obama and Attorney General Holder are not doing is another reason they shouldn't be in charge of our lives ever again. Tea Partiers?...right show me where unless you were the plant there. So one-sided you are and what does being black or white or purple have to do with anything? See, President Obama is continuing to make warfare among people of this country, as you are. This is not "Hope and Change" as Senator Obama promised while looking to gain our votes! I pray people see through his destruction of a great nation. It is amazing how he turns his cheek when he should set good examples instead. We now have the Black KKK thinking they can do anything they want. Again, how sad.
Carol Heckelmann: feekmatic: Let me enlighten you! What the Black Panthers did was against the law! And what Spike Lee did was against the law! And what President Obama and Attorney General Holder are not doing is another reason they shouldn't be in charge of our lives ever again. Tea Partiers?...right show me where unless you were the plant there. So one-sided you are and what does being black or white or purple have to do with anything? See, President Obama is continuing to make warfare among people of this country, as you are. This is not "Hope and Change" as Senator Obama promised while looking to gain our votes! I pray people see through his destruction of a great nation. It is amazing how he turns his cheek when he should set good examples instead. We now have the Black KKK thinking they can do anything they want. Again, how sad.
The black KKK still depends on the white elite to slap down the white rank-and-file by ignoring their concerns:
Get these self-indulgent hypocritical traitors out of the governor's office, the mayor's office, and the police commissioners offices, and the Black Panthers and most black gangs will rapidly cease to be a problem.
"As those articles I posted showed the police in the UK are getting more and more armed BUT they want to keep up the facade of being unarmed."
The articles you linked show no such thing. They say things like:
"The Federation's Paul Davis said this reflected members' desire to maintain the British tradition of "policing by consent" - as opposed to force. Our view has always been to have the right amount of officers on duty on any day to meet the assessed threat level," he said, adding that any decision to arm more police would need rigorous public debate. The Police Superintendents' Association is also against the routine arming of police, arguing for the current policy of using a limited number of highly-trained specialists. Arming all officers would damage the traditional image of the British Police Service which is held in such high esteem the world over, primarily because of the difficult and dangerous job officers undertake unarmed."
And also:
"Simon Reed, vice-chairman of the national federation, said that although majority of his members did not wish be to armed, forces must be free to respond to particular threats. The ethos will always be that the British police are unarmed, but we need officers to be able to use firearms when appropriate," he said. 'My feeling is that the current balance is just about right.' "
My bold there. How do you get from that to claiming that the police force is trying to arm itself by stealth? Supposition, conjecture and wishful thinking is my guess.
"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence."
/Hitch
So you yourself have seen multiple acts of violence but you claim that violence is not commonplace. Fighting is violence. If you have seen multiple acts of violence yourself (and you have not been deliberately putting yourself in that position) then you have no room to talk.
Ah, but I never said how many violent acts I've witnessed, did I? It's a very small number and when you take my age into account, it has been a very infrequent occurrence.
Your point? All places are weird in their own way. I would never live in England because human rights seem to be an afterthought. At least here in the US we try maintain our rights.
*cough* Patriot Act *cough* You could always try Wales, Scotland or Norn Ireland though. There's much more to the UK than dear, sweet old England.
Did you see the part that said:
"The Police Federation, which represents rank-and-file officers, called for a 5% increase in the number authorised to use guns. However, when it surveyed 47,328 members, 82% said they did not want officers to be routinely armed on duty"?
Irrelevant to my point.
I find your disingenuousness refreshing in its audacity. It is absolutely relevant to your false claim that the police force here is trying to arm itself by stealth. You've painted yourself into the corner of the room now. Claiming that the varnish isn't there won't get you out with clean feet.
-- In November 2009, U.S. army psychologist Major Nidal Hasan opened fire at a military base in Fort Hood, Texas, leaving 13 dead and 42 others wounded.
The above was an act of terrorism. And also evidence of how bugfuck insane our current weapons policy on military bases is. If a soldier wants to get ahold of a weapon they damn well will, banning soldiers from carrying sidearms on the base is fucking STUPID
Ok. I'm not sure that that really makes any difference. It was still a mass shooting, but even still, there's the twenty or so others since 1999.
Edit: For clarity's sake, I don't want to make this about "Ner! You're all mass murdering tools!"
I replied to a hyperbolic post by someone else about the alleged shittiness of the UK with one of my own referring to the US.
Also please note that Vdare's Immigrant Mass Murder Syndrome is a handy explanation for a large number of these attacks. Though...a caveat...they are Enoch Powell fans over there, so I guess that makes them inadmissible as evidence.
Despite the wishes of the Daily Mail, the rivers of blood are conspicuous only by their absence.
Just reading your posts, you betray a need to condemn Trayvon and defend his killer. I will tell you right now, if someone was following me home, harassing me, yelling at me "what are you doing" I would be fucking pissed, really pissed, and If I were 17 I might be stupid enough to act on it, the thought of "maybe this guy is one of those gun nuts" would never have crossed my mind. If Zimmerman is proven to have followed trayvon, I think its 100% certain (i obviously cant PROVE this but it just makes sense) that he was saying something at the time, and if Martin did get angry enough to go smack his dumbass in the mouth, I would say he deserved it. You dont just follow people because you think they are suspicious, you call the police if you really think they are out to do harm, even then I say give people the benefit of trhe doubt. And before you call me a hypocrite on that last bit, I want to say that no, I dont give lunatics like z the benefit of the doubt