Obviously, this law is racist.
What is it about getting your head slammed (and SEEN BY AT LEAST ONE WITNESS) doesn't the DA understand??
Probably because the criminal idiots who got themselves shot were more likely to be black thugs.
White on White
Black on Black
Black On White
White on Black, etc.
That would be helpful to see if Whites get off more or are assaulted more often and by whom.
Cause, meet effect.
Since Blacks make up 12% of the population but commit over 70% of the violent crimes, is this really surprising?
White victims asserting STG against black perps?
...while 59 percent of those who killed white people were penalized.
Black perps attempting to hide behind SYG against white victims?
Maybe some “educatin’” needs to be done to the hoody wearin’ yutes in the hood.
If they’d learn that you can get blown away by a citizen if you try and kill ‘em, then maybe they’ll think twice before assaulting someone walking around THEIR OWN NEIGHBORHOOD.
Naaaah.
Well... yes.
The author could have left out the following sentence: "At the time police did not have any evidence to prove Zimmerman wasn't acting in self-defense. "
Obviously, this law is racist.
What’s the article bitching about? Black on black crime is most of the crimes... so those black perps must be walking.
No, it could not be any more one sided. Most-likely illegal gun carrying, violent criminal histories, and a lack of knowledge about the law with the self control to abide by the law and fake stories that don’t match evidence has something to do with blacks losing cases.
A lot of blacks are getting shot because blacks are bullies. I am waiting for a pack of racist “yutes” to get blown away.
There was a hysterical response from Philadelphia authories when whites started talking about defending themselves from black hoodklan attacks in newspaper forums.
“At the time police did not have any evidence to prove Zimmerman wasn’t acting in self-defense”
They still don’t.
“The law tends to work for defendants whose victims were black, as 73 percent of those who killed black people were not penalized, while 59 percent of those who killed white people were penalized.”
Did it ever occur to this author that black “victims” may be more likely to have placed reasonable fear of death or grievous bodily harm in the minds of their killers?
Zimmerman was interrogated for five hours and took a lie detector test which he passed. There was no evidence then and there is still none now.
After the case was reviewed by a prosecutor, Zimmerman was charged with second-degree murder and is now in a Florida jail awaiting trial.
No -- the first prosecutor found no evidence to charge him with a crime. Then the race hustlers got involved, and invented evidence, like the invisible earwitness DeeDee who will never take a lie detector test and will probably be a no-show at her deposition and the trial if there is one.
Maybe that's because it's so hard to find an urban jury without a member having been violently assaulted by a black.
Let's see...
-- The law was successful for those who used it to dodge prosecution, as almost 70 percent have been freed.
Assumes that the default in self-defense cases is that they should be prosecuted, if not they "dodged" it.
-- The law tends to work for defendants whose victims were black, as 73 percent of those who killed black people were not penalized, while 59 percent of those who killed white people were penalized.
Since when is the assailiant in a self-defense case become the "victim"? Also, blacks are per capita much more likely to commit criminal assualts. Sorry, truth hurts.
Nope.
OK. And if you do further research which shows no difference in the danger present in the incidents or the criminality of the "victims", you might be onto something. In the meantime, it's just racebaiting, and very likely misleading racebaiting, so bugger off.