Times have changed, and if there is one thing I can say about most Americans, exclusion of many Liberals, we learn from mistakes. You being a person who has taken the stand and told us how educated you are, should know that the loss of that war was not from Southerners being cowards, that war was lost from logistics and lack of supplies. I believe if it came down to another showdown the outcome would be far different. City people do not know how to live off the land, their brand of gorilla warfare would be a failure in the open. Liberals, city dwellers, and those who have proven themselves as lazy uninspired parasites will look for a rock to hid under and wait for the government to come save you. Here is another news flash, the vast majority of the military is made up of men and women who are from the South. I doubt that they would fire upon their own people.




Seems to me you folks tried that strategy before in the 1860s.

BTW, how did that turn out for you folks???[/quote]

Mr Ed. With all the noise, I want to say that you are right. Many of the posters who are yelling for blood, for justice for this Airman who was so badly treated, I bet that they did not dig deep into the reports for any information other than what was in the link. Well, if you do take the time. Here is a bit of information that was conveniently missing from the link. The fight broke out, everyone was evacuated from the building. The fight continued to the parking lot. The man (Airman) in question WAS NOT PART OF THE FIGHT. But, He went about 1 block away, retrieved his gun from his vehicle and went back to where the people were fighting (now with a loaded gun) and went into the group of people fighting. A logical person would have to ask, was this premeditation? He had to walk the distance, he did not have to return to the fight, he had a choice of staying at his vehicle and waiting for his friend. He chose to take his loaded weapon back and enter into the scuffle. Seems to me that he went back with intent to shoot someone. Self defense? I do not think so. He had already escaped.

Really? Read what you wrote. You do not know this man, you were not at his trial, but still you go into calling him in no uncertain words the scum of the earth. Saying he had a superiority complex.... You scream and yell about the injustice to the other person, how he had a right to be disrespectful, he had a right to his loud music, all his rights....not once did you stop and say, HEY THERE ARE TWO SIDES to every situation. No, your brand of justice is one sided. Your brand of justice is reactionary. Your brand of justice is a lynch mob mentality. If the accused is white then the accused is guilty. That is the justice of America now!

Well, I respect your opinion. And in the light, I do hope that you respect my right to see this in a legal sense and not from a visceral reaction. BTW, the Zimmerman/Martin case is over. Just as this one, unless on his retrial a different verdict is rendered. To be honest, I am somewhat amazed that he was not taken directly from the courthouse to lethal injection. Perhaps that is the justice that many had wanted. Perhaps this would be the solution, any white person who shoots, regardless of reason, should be automatically executed..... would that then be your brand of justice?

I always read the stories and then look for additional information. I did find another photograph of Mr. Nobel and attached it to this comment.

Far too many people over react to things. I remember as a young person toilet papering a tree in front of a house. My Papa grounded my behind for a month and I had to go clean up the mess. Needless to say, that type of parenting is now obsolete, and antiquated idea that one should do to others how they want people to do to them. Sad. Glad that you were not offended by my question/remarks.

True! And it is time for parents to teach their children appropriate behavior.

Are you sure? I am sorry, but I think that the shooter was also black. Of course he could be of mixed race, but he sure does not look white to me.

Fom,

Not once have I defended Mr. Dunn. I have repeated several times that in my opinion he was wrong. But, it does not change the fact that the jurors did not find that they could convict him for murder. They convicted him on what they could agree upon. The variables, such as what would a reasonable person do was a big consideration. Did he fear for his life. That is, did he think he heard someone threaten to k**l him. The question is, did the person have the means to which to carry out the threat. In the mind of the accused, the answer was he believed that he saw a gun. So, the response to that question is the defendant was threatened and he was in fear for his life and there was a weapon. In the heat of the moment, with the information I just provided the next question, what would a reasonable person do. Could he outrun a gunshot? Could he have physically subdued the aggressors? Minus these options, what remained? He had a gun, it was loaded. In hindsight, he should not have gone to that store, he should not have asked the noise to be turned down, and he should have gone to a tanning booth before he left his home state.

My point is, if you are in a tense situation, and you are afraid you only have two options..... run like hell or try to take the other person/thing out. Your brain does not go through the what if situations. It goes on auto pilot and you react. That is the average person. For some people, they train (such as police and our military) not to react. My second point, this would not be a point of discussion had the roles been reversed. It would only be on the news for one time and it would be called an "accidental" shooting. But, the issue arises because the old guy was white. And should anyone create a topic on it, many would say that it is a myth and did not happen. No such thing as a black man k*****g a white and if they did so it was in self defense and because white man has kept him ens***ed and he had no opportunities. Don't think so? Read this thread from start to finish.

[/quote]

Bo,

He will never be in the general population. Sorry that may have disappointed not only you but others. And he will not be in a cell in Florida. He will be "farmed out" to another facility where he will not come in contact with any of the "friends" of the man that was k**led. Most probably back in his own state. And, more sad news, he will never spend more than 2 years in jail, if he spends that much time. The vast majority of his time will be in a medical facility where he will be under constant supervision.

Whereas the laws in Florida need to be changed, there is nothing in the near future to visit the stand your ground laws.

No worries. I will be around.

Funny!

We got great news today. Court was 10 minutes....she is now ours. Adoption papers in hand! She is so happy, she has not stopped giggling. I think she is relieved, I know that we are happy. She now wants to change her name. I am okay with it, but I think she needs to think about that before she jumps. It is unknown if she wants my last name or Mike's.... she is so funny. We are going out tonight to celebrate!

Being a great person and her Aunt, sorry but you will need to address those pesky things because I often mess them up! :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

While I work, you can take the opportunity to teach me the finer points of English.

Seriously, what is your system doing, not doing? If you want, I will try to walk you through the fixes. I am pretty good with doing step by step for system issues. And, I would be more than glad to give it a try. :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Nor do I. It was a simple inability to appreciate the humor on my part. I am working on it. My assignment from Mike is to sit with him every night and listen and tell jokes until I understand and can appreciate them...........I am trying, but humor and 1 and zeros have nothing in common. So, pray for me. And please have a bottle of aspirin in my cell for the headache I will get from my lessons!

That is kind, thank you~! The suspension will only last until she can pass a test. The test is several different scenarios that could be seen in multiple ways, and reactions could go from far left to far right. What she has to do is figure out which response is the most appropriate and the most important part, is she has to know why it is appropriate. The why is most important. She is only 16 (just turned in December), her past solutions have been pure reaction. Now we are trying to teach her to look at every angle, to take her emotions out of the equation, to weigh the importance of other people's feeling and then to formulate a response that will accomplish the need to participate and be heard while allowing the responder their dignity. We do not always need to agree and being assertive is okay as long as you are not combative.

I am an old woman, having a child at my age is tough work. So, please accept my sincere appreciation for your thoughtfulness. You are indeed a caring individual!