These kids should rot forever. The fucking dolts.
Well, i'll tell you.
Because once the police caught up to these murdering fucks, they didn't detain them for a few hours, and then release them scot-free because they were, you know, standing their ground against an aggressive foreigner who was running right at them, or something.
If that had happened, then it would probably be pretty big.
RAAH LIBRULS WANT TO MAKE THESE KIDS HEROS COZ TEHYRE BALCK AND THEY THINK IT ALWAYS IS GOOD TO KILL WHITEMEN BECUAZE THEY FEEL OPPRESSED FOR BEING POOR AN DUMB WITH NO JOBS AND GOT TROPHIEZ EVERY DAY FOR NOTHING JESSE JACKSON AL SHARPTON SELFESTEEM BENGHAZI IRS COVERUP
Yes. Yes, it is.
Twitter.
Behance.
Facebook.
Pinterest.
Tumblr.
5 comments:
Then the question you need to ask is why the Trayvon Martin case was allowed to be such a gigantic media sensation in the first place.
In the case of Christopher Lane, I agree it is because the police already caught the scumsuckers responsible, and there's no big controversy about whodunit whereas with Zimmerman it was all a matter of hearsay. Its kind of boring for the media when we already know who the killer was.
However, racially its another matter. Now, Lane's case probably isn't so serious since one of the killers is white, or at least light-skinned, so you can just attribute this as a bunch of psychopathic teens deciding to murder someone for kicks. Whereas everyone from Jesse Jackson to Sharpton to NBC did their best to paint Zimmerman as a Neo-Nazi, everything from "White-Hispanic" to the doctored 911 call. That is where I believe the outrage is being directed, not "Why isn't Lane getting the same treatment as Trayvon?" more "Why was Trayvon allowed to be a sensation in the first place?"
I would say it became a situation -- six weeks after the fact -- because it seemed incongruous that someone could follow someone, shoot them to death, and then be let off with a handshake.
People demaded a trial. We got a trial. The outcome was morally blurry but legally sound. Now we can move on, hopefully, even though some won't want to.
People needed closure. Just the other day, there was a horrible accident about 50 feet from my front door. A 12-year old kid was run over by a car and had half his body crushed; he's still alive, but will never be the same...
...i'm not sure what the police are doing to investigate the driver. Was she texting? Going too fast? They need to find that out. If they just said "accident, no fault" and let it drop -- based entirely on her testimony -- that would also be improper. "Yeah, the kid just jumped out at me, i had no way to avoid him." "Okay, ma'am, if you say so, have a nice day."
I just still think they let the whole thing go out of hand, hell, they could have perhaps talked instead about the merits of Stand Your Ground, instead they tried to make into a race issue that they had little to no proof it was.
And ouch, hope the kid makes it through.
It did get out of hand, but the forces to blame are good old American capitalism and freedom. There's no government news division that can halt stories like this, so the news that sells is the news people want... and people want salacious stories about racists and tragedy.
Trashy news is like Coke and Big Macs. People will seek out the tasty crap and pay for it far more often than they'll seek the blander, more nutritious fare.
Uh, no offense, having a government mandated news source would be just as bad as they'd only tell you want they want you to hear (With the exception of the BBC, they generally try to be more objective). And in the case of Zimmerman, the Justice Department deliberately intervened in a purely local case which only added fuel to the fire, so I doubt they would have tried to stop it.
Post a Comment