* Your post makes no sense…

Second amendment rights,
where the rubber meets the road.
Pilgrim:

He was deliberately shot because those officers perceived a threat. And get this: That is the standard courts have set in shootings like this.....did the officers perceive a threat?

Pparets:

You, Me, Rev. Sharpton and all others must recognize the rule of law in a civilized society.  If a jury of their peers found the officers not guilty, then one either accepts that verdict or appeals to the next highest court.

Agreed.  And this explains why whites were obsessed with the OJ trial after he was found not guilty?

Al Sharpton is a dedicated servant to his cause and his people. Has he profited thereby?  Assuredly, yes.  Has he made his minions feel better? Yes.  Many men have done less and done less well.

So what is your point?

Sharpton has taken the law into his own hands in an effort to shut New York down. 100 years ago, White lynch mobs also took the law into their own hands in the South.

Sooooo, you are comparing a protest to a lynch mob?  Why don’t you stop beating around the bush.

Sharpton is doing wrong and his wrong-doing cannot be justified.

I never said anything about justifying it.  I merely commented on Pilgrims attempt to mischaracterize it.

Shrug.

Pilgrim equivocates,

Let me set the record straight here. He wasn’t accidentally shot. He was deliberately shot because those officers perceived a threat.

So they mistakenly shot at him, 50 times, because they thought he was armed, but he actually wasn’t armed?  That was not an accident?

Accident: an unexpected happening causing loss or injury which is not due to any fault or misconduct on the part of the person injured but for which legal relief may be sought

What did Sean do except try to flee from undercover cops who could as easily been car jackers?  I might have fled too? 

I wouldn’t expect Hannitized to understand what having to make a split second decision to shoot or not to shoot would be like. If you’re wrong either way the results can be disastrous.

Uniformed policemen, yeah.  Undercover cops following guys from a strip-club, not so much.  I think they were a bit over-eager.  IMO.

And don’t give me the old, “well, they should have been sure”. Yeah. They should have. But they couldn’t be under the circumstances. The court agreed.

Again, you are talking about this like they were uniformed officers.  They werent.

Right you are pparets.

Good thing you can read between the lines.  I did’t do acid as a child, so my extra sensory skills don’t work like yours do.  Makes perfect sense now.

Sharpton is definately playing his “black man is victim” violin:

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2008/04/23/2008-04-23_rev_al_freeing_bell_cops_would_be_verdic.html

Guzman has denied threatening anyone with a gun, and Sharpton was outraged by the argument. “This smacks of Emmett Till - of reckless eyeballing,” the civil rights activist said.
....
Sharpton accused the defense of playing the race card by hiring African-American lawyers Martin and Anthony Ricco to represent two of the accused detectives.
“They purposely got two black attorneys so that they could say things that others couldn’t say to try and castigate, even in death, Sean Bell’s memory ... ,” Sharpton said at a rally at the 103rd Precinct stationhouse in Jamaica.

This is preposterous. Two of the three offficers standing trial were BLACK. Black officers kill a black man. Racism? Oh please. No one is “reading between the lines here”...Sharpton has been very upfront about his intentions.

So they mistakenly shot at him, 50 times, because they thought he was armed, but he actually wasn’t armed?  That was not an accident?

There were 5 officers who shot. That equals 10 shots per person. Two of the five weren’t even indicted by the grand jury. What hurts Bell’s case is that there was an altercation that police were responding to. They thought he was going to get a gun. This resulted in his tragic death. During the trial, the witnesses were grilled about constantly changing their stories, being criminals, and withdrawing former statements. In short, they were found to be untrustworthy.

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/the-sean-bell-verdict-and-al-sharptons-culture-of-grievance/

As was initially reported, Sean Bell drove forward, hitting an officer and another car.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15889445

So while these details have faded as the race baters pled their case...it seems clear that Bell was not some poor innocent victim here.

Now you celebrate cracking down on freedom of speech.

Some things are not included in free speech. Illegally blocking traffic is one. Just like I don’t get to graffiti your house and claim that it’s free speech.

Agreed.  And this explains why whites were obsessed with the OJ trial after he was found not guilty?

Because the perception was that OJ was let off for being black. Whether or not that was the juror’s intent, the black pundits had a field day reinforcing that perception.

Hannitized: 

and this explains why whies were obsessed with the OJ trial

Well, we both know the whole planet was obsessed because of the celebrity status of the trial, but
groups of whites did not set out to break the law after the verdict.

My point? I wasn’t trying to make a ‘point’. I was expressing my belief that civil disobedience takes many forms and tends to escalate.

I thought we were having a discussion, not a debate contest.

Pilgrim equivocates,

Hannitized: I’m not equivocating anything. I’;; try to explain this one more time so that even you can understand. I’ll type slowly. Maybe that will help.

This was NOT an accident. If someone is playing with a gun or showing it off or clearing a jam and it goes off, THAT’S an accident.

This was a deliberate shooting because the cops perceived a threat and THAT is the standard the courts use to determine whether a homicide, negligent or intentional, has been committed. If the officers genuinely perveived a threat at the moment then murder does not apply. Perception is key. Got an issue with that standard? Take it up with the Supreme Court and not with me.

That does not absolve the officers or the city of civil liability, however. The family can still sue. Sharpton knows that. He wants to put those guys in jail so he can claim victory.

I’m trained and qualified to investigate police misconduct, you moron. I’ve studied the Circuit Court and Supreme Court decisions in this area. Everything, EVERYTHING the police do is subject to court scrutiny. No new ground was broken here. The judge absolved those guys based on case law. Like most liberals you deal with emotion and not fact.

Get a clue before you argue this point again. I’ve explained it enough to you.

Here’s an interesting piece on Fox News today:

ELLICOTT CITY, Md. — The Howard County State’s Attorney’s Office says a driver who struck and killed a county police officer last year has paid her traffic fines.

Prosecutors say Stephanie Grissom of Columbia paid $310 in fines for speeding and negligent driving. She also received three points on her driving record.

In March, a county grand jury declined to indict Grissom on automobile manslaughter charges.

Police say Grissom was driving 71 mph in a 55-mph zone on Route 32 when she struck Officer Scott Wheeler. The officer was working a speed enforcement detail and had stepped into the road to flag Grissom down when he was struck.

Gee, where are the street protests on this one. Doesn’t count when the shoe’s on the other foot, does it?