....lybob Posted March 22, 2012 Posted March 22, 2012 I wanted to wait for BFMF to respond before giving you a substantive explanation. I'll keep this simple. While it has been determined that the equal protection clause protects people rather than classes of people, it's primary function is to protect people against LAWS that give disparate treatement. It could be used to challenge unequal enforcement of otherwise valid law, but this is not a case that would lend itself to such application. You'd need to establish a strong pattern of unequal treatment of individuals by the state. For this you would need to demonstrate that under virtually identical fact patterns different people received different treatment on the basis of race. There is no evidence of this here and thus it would be a VERY tenuous argument just to justify DOJs involvement, let alone application to the facts of this particular case. How do you know until you do an investigation? It's not like they're running down there and throwing people in prison, maybe they investigate and find nothing appropriate to their jurisdiction but it's silly to see they don't have the right to investigate - and of course if Obama thinks Zimmerman is causing harm to the country then he can have him whisked away to a black site for indefinite detention or have him killed after undefined due process.
DC Tom Posted March 22, 2012 Posted March 22, 2012 How do you know until you do an investigation? It's not like they're running down there and throwing people in prison, maybe they investigate and find nothing appropriate to their jurisdiction but it's silly to see they don't have the right to investigate - and of course if Obama thinks Zimmerman is causing harm to the country then he can have him whisked away to a black site for indefinite detention or have him killed after undefined due process. I'm sure that in the confines of your own head, this argument makes complete sense. You should have kept it there.
Rob's House Posted March 22, 2012 Posted March 22, 2012 How do you know until you do an investigation? It's not like they're running down there and throwing people in prison, maybe they investigate and find nothing appropriate to their jurisdiction but it's silly to see they don't have the right to investigate - and of course if Obama thinks Zimmerman is causing harm to the country then he can have him whisked away to a black site for indefinite detention or have him killed after undefined due process. Forgetting for a minute the legal implications, it's just down right silly for the AG to go on a fishing expedition based on what we have here. To follow your logic there isn't any situation that wouldn't warrant a Federal investigation because you wouldn't really know for certain that there wasn't some applicable issue until you investigated every possible angle. And while it's obviously not illegal for Holder to poke around and ask questions (no law against asking questions), launching a full-fledged federal investigation into the matter would be an abuse of power at best. It is no less absurd than Bush involving himself in the Terry Shiavo incident. The reality here is that Holder is part of a regime that is obsessed with race and racism; particularly anti-black racism, other racism not so much. This has very little to do with him fulfilling any legitimate role of his position and everything to do with him taking advantage of his position to further his own goals based on personal prejudices and it's multiplied by the media attention this is receiving. Of course morons like BFMF are numerous and have no regard for such inconveniences as separation of powers and jurisdiction as long as it furthers an end that makes him feel good.
IDBillzFan Posted March 22, 2012 Posted March 22, 2012 Forgive me for not paying closer attention to this, but I thought I heard today that the Hispanic guy with the German name lived in a gated community, and that the boy he killed lived in it as well. And that this took place within the community. Did I hear that right?
....lybob Posted March 22, 2012 Posted March 22, 2012 I'm sure that in the confines of your own head, this argument makes complete sense. You should have kept it there. Tom I'm sure in the confines of your head you think you're intelligent, maybe your Mom said you were a smart boy or your father called you a clever lad but they were just being nice at least that's my opinion based on a couple thousand posts of yours- I did miss the first 28,000 give or take so maybe at one time you were scintillating and then went senile.
Alaska Darin Posted March 22, 2012 Posted March 22, 2012 Hey! Remember me? Sincerely, The Duke Lacrosse "Case"
3rdnlng Posted March 22, 2012 Posted March 22, 2012 Hey! Remember me? Sincerely, The Duke Lacrosse "Case" You mean those guys that brutally raped the innocent black girl? What ever happened to that district attorney?
DC Tom Posted March 22, 2012 Posted March 22, 2012 You mean those guys that brutally raped the innocent black girl? What ever happened to that district attorney? Weren't they convicted for violating federal "equal protection" charges?
3rdnlng Posted March 22, 2012 Posted March 22, 2012 Weren't they convicted for violating federal "equal protection" charges? It was for not using any protection.
birdog1960 Posted March 23, 2012 Posted March 23, 2012 some interesting racial history in good ole sanford. running off jackie robinson....sure, it's background info but possibly part of the rest of the story. and no npr and pbs aren't my only sources of news.
3rdnlng Posted March 23, 2012 Posted March 23, 2012 some interesting racial history in good ole sanford. running off jackie robinson....sure, it's background info but possibly part of the rest of the story. and no npr and pbs aren't my only sources of news. That seems pretty typical of race relations over the years. To conclude that Sanford is a hotbed of racism now is ridiculous. I guess it is possible that it is but seems like just a typical southern community.
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 23, 2012 Posted March 23, 2012 I also heard that about Sanford... Seems around 1911 or so, the all black town of Goldsboro was absorbed by Sanford.. A lot of animosity stems from that due to the economic inequality in that takeover... Still to this day. Quite shocking 100 years later. On NPR, they interviewed a man who's boss was deathly afraid of touching an African American.
IDBillzFan Posted March 23, 2012 Posted March 23, 2012 some interesting racial history in good ole sanford. running off jackie robinson....sure, it's background info but possibly part of the rest of the story. and no npr and pbs aren't my only sources of news. I'm sure the young boy with Skittles and iced tea would be thrilled to find out that his senseless murder is no longer about him, but about advancing a story of racism based on the possibility that somehow a Jackie Robinson story is relevant to his death. Jesus.
3rdnlng Posted March 23, 2012 Posted March 23, 2012 I also heard that about Sanford... Seems around 1911 or so, the all black town of Goldsboro was absorbed by Sanford.. A lot of animosity stems from that due to the economic inequality in that takeover... Still to this day. Quite shocking 100 years later. On NPR, they interviewed a man who's boss was deathly afraid of touching an African American. Very good. You actually clicked on the link and read the article. Then you took everything in the article that appears racist and repeated it.
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 23, 2012 Posted March 23, 2012 <br />I'm sure the young boy with Skittles and iced tea would be thrilled to find out that his senseless murder is no longer about him, but about advancing a story of racism based on the possibility that somehow a Jackie Robinson story is relevant to his death.<br /><br />Jesus.<br /><br /><br /><br /> Really. If that was me pushing daisies... I would be thrilled! It is not about him anymore... Except for the family wanting justice... It is about not letting another Trayvon die. And yes, it is relevant to bring up past history to light. <br />Very good. You actually clicked on the link and read the article. Then you took everything in the article that appears racist and repeated it.<br /><br /><br /><br /> I didn't read the article... I Listened to the program in the car earlier. Sorry, just shooting from the hip again... Nothing wrong with it... Just talking.
Bigfatbillsfan Posted March 23, 2012 Posted March 23, 2012 The only thing obvious here is that you're a !@#$ing retard. Before we get into the DOJ's role let's start with the assumptions you've pulled straight out of your ass. First, how do we know this was a racial killing? We don't. I saw a piece on this case last night and it sounded to me like he said "these !@#$S always get away with it". Do we just take your preconceived notion that he muct have meant blacks when he said !@#$s. Is there no other possible inference? Second, you have no !@#$ing idea what transpired. Nor do I. For all you know the kid was up to something nefarious, saw the guy following him, attacked him, and during the attack the guy pulled out his gun and shot him. You don't know. The cops who know a hell of a lot more about the situation and the law than you don't yet believe they have a strong enough case to prove murder beyond a reasonable doubt. So the only actual FACTS you're basing your assumption on is that the kid was black and the guy was pursuing him prior to whatever altercation took place. So to follow your reasoning to its logical conclusion, any time a black kid is shot by someone who isn't also black, and the local cops don't prosecute right away, The Attorney General of the US should stick his nose in the middle of it. Or is it only in cases that the national media picks up and exploits? And I love your assertion that it is the role of the DOJ to pursue a local law enforcement case that is light on facts with long odds on prosecution to make sure the black community "knows it's been heard." If it was a white kid who got shot do you think for half a second Eric Holder would give two ***** and a good god damn about this case? Would you be calling for his involvement? Should they prosecute a guy they didn't think was guilty to appease the white community's need to be heard? Also, if the local cops are in dereliction of duty wouldn't it follow that the state would pursue this before jumping straight to the !@#$ing feds. Why don't you look up the word "Federalism" and get back to me. After you do that how about citing a source from which the DOJ would derive the authority to pursue this in the first case, because the court isn't very receptive to the "we overreached the bounds of our authority because we thought it was for a good cause" argument. At least ...lybob made an attempt, futile though it may have been, to address this key issue. Wow, you could have read the part where I said based on the facts that we currently have and saved yourself this entire rant of absolute drivel. A Hispanic man chased down and shot an unarmed black youth is a fact in this case. I did not pull it out of my ass. The DoJ is investigating at this point. They are not prosecuting. Did you get that point? If new evidence comes to light it may change the case. However, at this point it looks like an obvious racial killing.
DC Tom Posted March 23, 2012 Posted March 23, 2012 It is not about him anymore... Except for the family wanting justice... It is about not letting another Trayvon die. Yeah. And you must be the only person in the country that thinks "rainbow-farting unicorn" is literal, and not a metaphor.
Bigfatbillsfan Posted March 23, 2012 Posted March 23, 2012 Forgetting for a minute the legal implications, it's just down right silly for the AG to go on a fishing expedition based on what we have here. To follow your logic there isn't any situation that wouldn't warrant a Federal investigation because you wouldn't really know for certain that there wasn't some applicable issue until you investigated every possible angle. And while it's obviously not illegal for Holder to poke around and ask questions (no law against asking questions), launching a full-fledged federal investigation into the matter would be an abuse of power at best. It is no less absurd than Bush involving himself in the Terry Shiavo incident. The reality here is that Holder is part of a regime that is obsessed with race and racism; particularly anti-black racism, other racism not so much. This has very little to do with him fulfilling any legitimate role of his position and everything to do with him taking advantage of his position to further his own goals based on personal prejudices and it's multiplied by the media attention this is receiving. Of course morons like BFMF are numerous and have no regard for such inconveniences as separation of powers and jurisdiction as long as it furthers an end that makes him feel good. Talk about pulling facts out of your ass...
3rdnlng Posted March 23, 2012 Posted March 23, 2012 (edited) <br /><br /><br /> Really. If that was me pushing daisies... I would be thrilled! It is not about him anymore... Except for the family wanting justice... It is about not letting another Trayvon die. And yes, it is relevant to bring up past history to light. <br /><br /><br /> I didn't read the article... I Listened to the program in the car earlier. Sorry, just shooting from the hip again... Nothing wrong with it... Just talking. You listen to schit that happened 100 years ago (other than Jackie Robinson not getting to play in a spring training game) and assume that it's a racist community now? I heard that this guy Zimmermann had lacerations both on the front of his neck and the back. How true? Who knows? He could have done it to himself. All the people getting their panties all in a wad should just sit back and let it play out. As Darin said, remember the Duke lacrosse player f'up? How about Tawnya Brawley? Don't be so anxious to come to conclusions. Edited March 23, 2012 by 3rdnlng
ExiledInIllinois Posted March 23, 2012 Posted March 23, 2012 <br />Yeah. And you must be the only person in the country that thinks "rainbow-farting unicorn" is literal, and not a metaphor.<br /> Spock you ignorant fool... It is okay to have some emotion! <br />You listen to schit that happened 100 years ago (other than Jackie Robinson not getting to play in a spring training game) and assume that it's a racist community now? I heard that this guy Zimmermann had lacerations both on the front of his neck and the back. How true? Who knows? He could have done it to himself. All the people getting their panties all in a wad should just sit back and let it play out. As Darin said, remember the Duke lacrosse player f'up? How about Tawnya Brawley? Don't be so anxious to come to conclusions.<br /> WOW! Sweet mother of God... Where the heck did you come up with this schit? Tom giving you reading comp lessons again?
Recommended Posts