If they charge him they charge him. Likewise if they don't, they dont.

If we give in to 'justice' by angry mobs or popular anger against people or groups, we might as well throw the constitution and rule of law out the window.

The justice system isn't always fair, and in parts it has corrupt judges, or incompetent jurries, but sending someone to prison because they are hated by a section of the community is not justice, rather a lynch mob or drumhead trial.
 
Let them protest. But as soon as that turns to looting or criminal activity- hose 'em down and scrape 'em up.

"Stay on course".
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #8
I will accept either. Those that don't are as much of the problem as the rioters imo.
If you were truly indifferent about it you wouldn't have felt the need to start a thread.
If you truly weren't a moron you would realize this thread is a counter to all the other hyperpartisan over the top threads & posts. I am as indifferent as one can be. Sure I have an informal opinion as most do but unlike most I'm willing to admit it's just an opinion.
 
I'll accept either as well.

However, it is interesting that the prosecutor in a grand jury hearing is allowing the "defense" an opportunity to present their side of the case.

Not the way it normally goes down.
 
If we give in to 'justice' by angry mobs or popular anger against people or groups, we might as well throw the constitution and rule of law out the window.

Man where have you been the US Constitution was already thrown out the window about 40-30 years ago now its in a landfill
I can get cynical sometimes, but the US is hardly that far gone.
 
If we give in to 'justice' by angry mobs or popular anger against people or groups, we might as well throw the constitution and rule of law out the window.

Man where have you been the US Constitution was already thrown out the window about 40-30 years ago now its in a landfill
I can get cynical sometimes, but the US is hardly that far gone.

Its gone man what this current CIC hell the last couple of them should've been arrested but no they get to live like kings for the rest of their days
 
I'll accept either as well.

However, it is interesting that the prosecutor in a grand jury hearing is allowing the "defense" an opportunity to present their side of the case.

Not the way it normally goes down.
Had the prosecutor has a single shred of evidence against Wilson he would have NEVER allowed Wilson's defense anywhere near the GJ.
As it happens the pros. was bright enough not to drag the non-case through the court system only for Wilson to be found not guilty a year from now anyway.
THEN there would be negro rioting!
He saved the State millions of much needed money to boot.
He knew there would be negro rioting/looting/violence in either case.
Even that cock sucker Holder couldn't fabricate any dirt against Wilson.
BOBO has had the GJ ruling in his desk for two weeks.
He's just waiting for the best time to ensure the Tree Dwellers do as much damage as possible.
THEN BOBO will 'step in' and be the great conciliator. He needs something to help his failed Presidency.
More 'speaker's fees' later.
 
I will accept either. Those that don't are as much of the problem as the rioters imo.
If you were truly indifferent about it you wouldn't have felt the need to start a thread.
If you truly weren't a moron you would realize this thread is a counter to all the other hyperpartisan over the top threads & posts. I am as indifferent as one can be. Sure I have an informal opinion as most do but unlike most I'm willing to admit it's just an opinion.

Unless I am missing something, your opinion seems to be that people who disagree with the outcome but don't riot are just as bad as those who do riot. And those who question that are morons?
 

Forum List

Back
Top