See 18 United States Code Section 241 regarding non-state actors violating civil rights.
See 18 United States Code Section 241 regarding non-state actors violating civil rights.
Yes. His recent statements clearly shows that he has no balls.Originally Posted by Alpha Sierra
Perhaps this is out of my lane, but personally I think Holders presence is just government riot-prevention.
When this officer is no billed, Holder will be there to say "charges will be considered for violation of X YZ civil right statue, blah blah etc." Which eliminates the perceived justification for a riot by the masses-especially because Holder is black. Yeah, that's jacked up that people care about the skin color of our public servants, but here we are. The anticulture in black America will have no leg to stand on if they go militant with Holder around.
Once the heat dies down Holder and Co. packs up for DC and the media goes back to what haircut Kanye West has right now.
The Minority Marksman.
"When you meet a swordsman, draw your sword: Do not recite poetry to one who is not a poet."
-a Ch'an Buddhist axiom.
I hope you're right
No dice. Zimmerman acted alone. Besides, there is no civil right to assault someone so Traaaayvon's "rights" were not violated in any case.
I assume the potential charge would have been 18 USC S 249.
That's why one keeps quiet about motivation
Quite so. This post:
was just meant to illustrate, by using an example, that you were wrong about this:
Has anyone heard about any riots related to this?
It had seemed to the four clean-cut college freshman that night like a typical McDonald’s: spanking clean, well-lighted, and safe. It was in a good neighborhood too, right next to Texas A&M University in College Station – a campus known for its friendly atmosphere and official down-home greeting: “howdy”
Out on a double date, the two couples pulled into the parking lot of so-called “University McDonald’s” shortly after 2 a.m. that Sunday – and beheld a scene unlike anything portrayed in all those wholesome McDonald’s television commercials. Before them, hundreds of young black males were loitering about, some without shirts.
Other local residents — the more cynical and world-weary, both whites and most blacks — would have taken one look at the crowd and driven off, dismissing many of the young and posturing black males as thugs. But not them: innocent white kids from the suburbs. They presumed this was post-racial America — and that they were in an easy-going college town.
Twenty minutes later, two of them were dead...
No, but there should have been
Reply With Quote