I didn't say he was clearly guilty. I said there looks like enough probable cause to arrest and try him. Or at the very least to continue to investigate.
I can't speak for the President. What I interpreted his remarks to mean is that, based on the 911 call, Zimmerman judged Davis as a menace based on his appearance, which may have included his skin color, especially since other reports say Zimmerman specifically warned about blacks to his neighbors.
I don't know how to tell if someone was kicked out of school from their appearance. Technically, Davis was suspended, not kicked out. And yeah that probably wouldn't happen to a child of Obama's because, like most upper-class families, if a child of Obama's was caught with trace amounts of marijuana, nobody would care (now that Andrew Breitbart is dead, that is).
As for "gang-related tattoos", you're a more perceptive man than I. Which gang is that apparent tattoo related to? Anyway, I don't remember Zimmerman mentioning any gang-related tattoos to the dispatcher. Maybe that's because it was raining and Davis had a hoodie on, meaning he wouldn't have seen any if they were there. I guess you are a proponent of shoot-first, check for gang-related tattoos and school records later, then? After all, you never know when someone might shoot you with a skittle.
In my experience with CNN, you don't have to be liberal or conservative, just old and/or moronic. Seriously, they are worse and worse every day, with their segments of reading random tweets on air, or trying to package stories of little note up into cute branded segments.
Jon Stewart's criticisms of CNN, ever since he took on their refitted (and dumbed-down) Crossfire, have never missed. In many ways, it's a sadder state of affairs than anything that happens on Fox News.
Well, the police chief has stepped down "temporarily", which may become permanent, and the governor appointed a special prosecutor. I wouldn't exactly say the police and DA are skating, although the worst they may face is a tarnished reputation.
There's lots of high-profile cases, yet somehow we find a way to truck on.
If it makes you feel any better, my own mother (who doest watch much TV) didn't know anything about the case.
Personally, I just thought it was pretty obvious the guy should have been arrested and charged, given the basics of the case. He pursued someone, which is not under dispute, and a short time later was engaged in an altercation with said person in which he shot them. Maybe it will turn out there's not enough evidence to convict him, but surely there was probable cause to arrest him, regardless of the "Stand Your Ground" law (persuit and confrontation is not standing one's ground).
Wow. Can't help but feed the troll here. Where to start? Let's see... your link to a story that 'hardly gets a column in the local news' is a link to the NY Daily Post about an event in Kansas City. A simple google search shows various other coverage of the case. And a big difference in that case: the police were *actually looking to arrest the perpetrators* (whether they've caught them or not is not clear).
The Trayvon Davis story blew up because of how it was mishandled between the police and the DA. If they had arrested Zimmerman from the start, even if he ended getting off on a self-defense claim, it wouldn't have been as big. It would be a footnote in the list of reasons why an overbroad "Stand Your Ground" law is a bad idea.
And, even if the attack in KC was mishandled similarly, what's that have to do with the Davis case? Outrage would be warranted in both cases.
But yeah, your recent photos of Trayvon (including one fake one) convince me. He flipped the bird at a web cam! And he's black! Death for the hoodlum! Wait, you know what? I need to see a photo of the suspect in a suit. If you can produce one of those, then I'll really be convinced.
I'll give you this though: you really have provided clear support for that Einstein quote in your sig.
I don't know about the metal spikes, but of your contention is that people would drive safer, and there would this be less fatalities and injuries, if not for the moral hazard introduced by seatbelts and air bags, I think there's probably enough data to sift through to test that theory.
C'mon, they've got likenesses of the film actors all over the place. How did they think they wouldn't get sued? Maybe if they weren't passing around cards with Cate Blanchett as Galadrial, the main cast on their menus, and lord knows what else, they'd have continued to fly under the radar. How they've escaped the ire of The Tolkien family themselves is beyond me.
Also, the article only says they've been told to stop using the characters, it's not clear they have to change the name of the joint ("The Hobbit" was a title, not one of the characters).
They didn't go back in time. What are you talking about? The crew couldn't have hidden out on planet Vulcan with their stolen Klingon bird-of-prey because THERE WAS NO PLANET VULCAN! Joss Whedon blew it up!
Seems to me that known pedophiles attempting to interact with schoolchildren and women disturbing the peace with her late night orgasmic screams probably are both illegal.
Instead of trying to tax unrealized gains, why not consider a loan secured by unrealized gains to be income, and allow the individual to write off payments against the loan principle (and possibly interest)?
If I enter an off-setting short position in a stock I hold long (i.e. a perfect hedge), the IRS now considers that the same as if I sold the stock, to avoid similar end-runs arounds capital gains taxes. I don't see this situation as much different.
Similar to how those who wish to demonize a thing come up with their own terms, like "piracy", as if sharing a Beatles song is the same as hijacking a tobacco ship and slaughtering all of the crew.
Slashdot Mirror
Not if you start the altercation.
I didn't say he was clearly guilty. I said there looks like enough probable cause to arrest and try him. Or at the very least to continue to investigate.
I can't speak for the President. What I interpreted his remarks to mean is that, based on the 911 call, Zimmerman judged Davis as a menace based on his appearance, which may have included his skin color, especially since other reports say Zimmerman specifically warned about blacks to his neighbors.
I don't know how to tell if someone was kicked out of school from their appearance. Technically, Davis was suspended, not kicked out. And yeah that probably wouldn't happen to a child of Obama's because, like most upper-class families, if a child of Obama's was caught with trace amounts of marijuana, nobody would care (now that Andrew Breitbart is dead, that is).
As for "gang-related tattoos", you're a more perceptive man than I. Which gang is that apparent tattoo related to? Anyway, I don't remember Zimmerman mentioning any gang-related tattoos to the dispatcher. Maybe that's because it was raining and Davis had a hoodie on, meaning he wouldn't have seen any if they were there. I guess you are a proponent of shoot-first, check for gang-related tattoos and school records later, then? After all, you never know when someone might shoot you with a skittle.
In my experience with CNN, you don't have to be liberal or conservative, just old and/or moronic. Seriously, they are worse and worse every day, with their segments of reading random tweets on air, or trying to package stories of little note up into cute branded segments.
Jon Stewart's criticisms of CNN, ever since he took on their refitted (and dumbed-down) Crossfire, have never missed. In many ways, it's a sadder state of affairs than anything that happens on Fox News.
Well, the police chief has stepped down "temporarily", which may become permanent, and the governor appointed a special prosecutor. I wouldn't exactly say the police and DA are skating, although the worst they may face is a tarnished reputation.
There's lots of high-profile cases, yet somehow we find a way to truck on.
If it makes you feel any better, my own mother (who doest watch much TV) didn't know anything about the case.
Personally, I just thought it was pretty obvious the guy should have been arrested and charged, given the basics of the case. He pursued someone, which is not under dispute, and a short time later was engaged in an altercation with said person in which he shot them. Maybe it will turn out there's not enough evidence to convict him, but surely there was probable cause to arrest him, regardless of the "Stand Your Ground" law (persuit and confrontation is not standing one's ground).
Actually, he did apparently organize some neighborhood watch activities, according to the NY Times article on this.
The rest of your criticisms are spot on, though.
Wow. Can't help but feed the troll here. Where to start? Let's see... your link to a story that 'hardly gets a column in the local news' is a link to the NY Daily Post about an event in Kansas City. A simple google search shows various other coverage of the case. And a big difference in that case: the police were *actually looking to arrest the perpetrators* (whether they've caught them or not is not clear).
The Trayvon Davis story blew up because of how it was mishandled between the police and the DA. If they had arrested Zimmerman from the start, even if he ended getting off on a self-defense claim, it wouldn't have been as big. It would be a footnote in the list of reasons why an overbroad "Stand Your Ground" law is a bad idea.
And, even if the attack in KC was mishandled similarly, what's that have to do with the Davis case? Outrage would be warranted in both cases.
But yeah, your recent photos of Trayvon (including one fake one) convince me. He flipped the bird at a web cam! And he's black! Death for the hoodlum! Wait, you know what? I need to see a photo of the suspect in a suit. If you can produce one of those, then I'll really be convinced.
I'll give you this though: you really have provided clear support for that Einstein quote in your sig.
Luckily, no one watches MSNBC.
But did you hear that Davis was wearing a hoodie? JUSTIFIABLE HOMICIDE!
(Incidentally, if he was wearing Crocs it would also be justifiable homicide.)
What if the developers just pocket half the money?
I'd be more curious about where the other half is going. Don't you *expect* most of the money to go toward the developers?
I don't know about the metal spikes, but of your contention is that people would drive safer, and there would this be less fatalities and injuries, if not for the moral hazard introduced by seatbelts and air bags, I think there's probably enough data to sift through to test that theory.
The most likely result will be to counteract the dilution of shares due to conversion of employee stock options.
there is no connection between a bar called "The Hobbit" and the book or the movie of the same name
You can't honestly believe that can you? Did you watch the video?
C'mon, they've got likenesses of the film
actors all over the place. How did they think they wouldn't get sued? Maybe if they weren't passing around cards with Cate Blanchett as Galadrial, the main cast on their menus, and lord knows what else, they'd have continued to fly under the radar. How they've escaped the ire of The Tolkien family themselves is beyond me.
Also, the article only says they've been told to stop using the characters, it's not
clear they have to change the name of the joint ("The Hobbit" was a title, not one of the characters).
And he blew up Sybok too!
They didn't go back in time. What are you talking about? The crew couldn't have hidden out on planet Vulcan with their stolen Klingon bird-of-prey because THERE WAS NO PLANET VULCAN! Joss Whedon blew it up!
Why didn't anyone ever tell me to try running my programs at intervals while I develop them?
You guys just blew my mind.
...buy your own laptop.
Seems to me that known pedophiles attempting to interact with schoolchildren and women disturbing the peace with her late night orgasmic screams probably are both illegal.
Pay down the US debt with US debt? That sounds as useful as putting a portable hole inside a bag of holding.
Instead of trying to tax unrealized gains, why not consider a loan secured by unrealized gains to be income, and allow the individual to write off payments against the loan principle (and possibly interest)?
If I enter an off-setting short position in a stock I hold long (i.e. a perfect hedge), the IRS now considers that the same as if I sold the stock, to avoid similar end-runs arounds capital gains taxes. I don't see this situation as much different.
Similar to how those who wish to demonize a thing come up with their own terms, like "piracy", as if sharing a Beatles song is the same as hijacking a tobacco ship and slaughtering all of the crew.
They'll probably still want their fishing
in Maine though.
Tell that to my consistently 2GB-hoarding Firefox process that grows overnight.
...we're all still alive.
I don't think the 5th Amendment applies, unless it's the hard drive is being tried. There's no hard drive/user confidentiality rule that I know of.