Four Minneapolis officers fired after death of black man part II

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • nonobaddog

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 10, 2015
    12,216
    113
    Tropical Minnesota
    In Minneapolis, Lake Street has had a checkered past but was doing pretty well lately, at least before wuhu hit. It was home to very many minority owned businesses.
    The hardest hit areas were Lake Street, Humboldt Avenue and little mogadishu.
    Humboldt Avenue was doing pretty well too but little mogadishu was already going downhill before the fires.
    I don't know about the other "riot cities" but I would say the people in Minneapolis played it pretty dumb.
     

    kickbacked

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 12, 2010
    2,393
    113
    Yes because she is the only person in the world who would think that way. Zero chance any other juror had the same opinion. :rolleyes:
    Well everyone in the world's opinion doesnt matter. Just the 12 that swore an oath that made the verdict. Potential jurors were removed prior to the trial for feeling intimidated. At anytime if one felt they could not be impartial it was their duty to come forward. Not doing so I believe could be grounds for juror misconduct.
     

    buckwacker

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    11   0   0
    Mar 23, 2012
    3,146
    97
    Well everyone in the world's opinion doesnt matter. Just the 12 that swore an oath that made the verdict. Potential jurors were removed prior to the trial for feeling intimidated. At anytime if one felt they could not be impartial it was their duty to come forward. Not doing so I believe could be grounds for juror misconduct.
    Ok, she was an alternate, which means she sat through the trial listening to evidence just like the twelve who rendered the verdict. She wasn't removed from the jury like you say would have happened. Your system didn't work. This will be overturned on appeal.
     

    kickbacked

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 12, 2010
    2,393
    113
    If thr participants are offended by the truth then perhaps they should change their ways.
    How would you like "the blacks" to change?
    Ok, she was an alternate, which means she sat through the trial listening to evidence just like the twelve who rendered the verdict. She wasn't removed from the jury like you say would have happened. Your system didn't work. This will be overturned on appeal.
    I have a hard time believing a woman is worried about the consequences of a trial she wasnt asked to make a verdict on. Who then goes out and makes her full name and appearance available to the world, which could result in a possible mistrial that would have everyone looking for her. You're nervous and then you go and put the spotlight on yourself? Thats a bold method, lets see how it works out.

    My system does work, she chose to tell the media instead of the court after the fact. Chauvin deserved a fair trial, and if any of those jurors did not give him one imo they should go to jail.
     

    JettaKnight

    Я з Україною
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    6   0   0
    Oct 13, 2010
    26,700
    113
    Fort Wayne
    Ok, she was an alternate, which means she sat through the trial listening to evidence just like the twelve who rendered the verdict. She wasn't removed from the jury like you say would have happened. Your system didn't work. This will be overturned on appeal.
    Weather is warming... time to plant rutabagas... :whistle:
     

    Tombs

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    12,294
    113
    Martinsville
    Thats not offensive or anything.
    Talking about serious grievances that need addressed, or even simply explained for the sake of understanding, should not invite the mob of shouting it down as offensive.
    It should encourage rational and logical rebuttal, and elaboration on why their concerns are either wrong, or if self reflection is necessary and maybe some discussion is needed.

    I know that yelling labels is the intellectually easier path, thus it's the most common one... But I think we can do better than that around here.
     

    Tombs

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    12,294
    113
    Martinsville
    How would you like "the blacks" to change?

    To explain their reasoning and be willing to engage on a discussion of the topic rather than immediately shut off, throw some label, and run away.

    I can't tell you the number of times I've been told "I don't owe you any explanation." And that's certainly not encouraging any sympathy from me.
     

    IndyDave1776

    Grandmaster
    Emeritus
    Rating - 100%
    12   0   0
    Jan 12, 2012
    27,286
    113
    How would you like "the blacks" to change?
    I would like those examples who are in the habit of rioting, burning, looting, making everything about race, and blaming people like me who didn't have a ****ing thing to do with their problems to stop, and then have an honest conversation.

    They can also stop with the reparations nonsense. I don't owe them a damned thing. If we want to go with things done by people none of us knew from the past, well then, where the hell is the gratitude for my family contributing 2 men to the Union Army and 0 to the Confederate?

    If these stupid bastards had gone with a political issue like law enforcement reform, I could get on board with seeing that it is fair and evenly applied. They didn't. They made it about race and we are seeing numerous examples of hate directed to anyone who happens to be white.

    They can go suck a bag of d***s.
     

    KLB

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Sep 12, 2011
    23,966
    77
    Porter County
    Talking about serious grievances that need addressed, or even simply explained for the sake of understanding, should not invite the mob of shouting it down as offensive.
    It should encourage rational and logical rebuttal, and elaboration on why their concerns are either wrong, or if self reflection is necessary and maybe some discussion is needed.

    I know that yelling labels is the intellectually easier path, thus it's the most common one... But I think we can do better than that around here.
    Like labeling blacks as people who burn down businesses in their own neighborhoods?

    You guys obviously missed the point. Kut's sarcastic reply kind of showed how silly the original comment was.
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    62,285
    113
    Gtown-ish
    How would you like "the blacks" to change?
    Is it offensive to say “the whites” need to change? I kinda think that if it’s offensive to say “the blacks” need to change it’s offensive to say “the <any identity group>“ needs to change because it implies that it’s the race that is the problem and not just the behavior of some people within the racial group.

    But it’s fair to point out specific problematic members of an identity group. Like it’s fair to say Black people who say “whiteness” is problematic are racist AF. And it would be equally racist AF for White people to say, “blackness” is problematic. But then we don’t hear the latter being said on national TV with impunity, ever. So it looks to me like we don’t apply the standards equally, do we?
     

    buckwacker

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    11   0   0
    Mar 23, 2012
    3,146
    97
    How would you like "the blacks" to change?

    I have a hard time believing a woman is worried about the consequences of a trial she wasnt asked to make a verdict on. Who then goes out and makes her full name and appearance available to the world, which could result in a possible mistrial that would have everyone looking for her. You're nervous and then you go and put the spotlight on yourself? Thats a bold method, lets see how it works out.

    My system does work, she chose to tell the media instead of the court after the fact. Chauvin deserved a fair trial, and if any of those jurors did not give him one imo they should go to jail.
    So you have a hard time believing that a white woman who lives in an area, where people rioted, burned, looted, and killed people because they thought a white cop killed a black guy because he was black, has no reason to fear for her safety if she wouldn't have rendered the verdict that they demanded in exchange for not burning the city down again? If so, it would seem you were shorted some common sense.

    With respect to individual jurors, which do you think would be more acceptable to the mob: giving them the verdict they wanted even though it's overturned on appeal, or rendering a not guilty verdict?
     

    foszoe

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    24   0   0
    Jun 2, 2011
    17,627
    113
    I wonder who told the blacks it was a good idea to burn down businesses in their own neighborhoods. Where are they going to get their next bag of toilet paper?

    Obviously I wasn't consulted in their strategy meetings but that just seems stupid.
    Maybe you should attend one and help out with the strategic planning.
     
    Top Bottom