Hey now...let the race-baiting, black panther-types and their ilk own this kind of talk.
And let's leave the construing what somebody says in the worst possible way and basing emotional arguments on misinterpretation to the liberals.
hornadylnl said:Martin looked suspicious. Look where that got him. With what's been said in this thread, you don't think there are those here who wouldn't associate a "suspicious" black man with any and all rioters?
Frankly if there were a bunch of blacks rioting it would be stupid not to be suspicious of, well, suspicious-looking strange black men. Now I know you're paralleling this all to Martin, so I'll explain it slowly for you. Martin wasn't shot simply because he was a black guy. He wasn't shot just because Zimmerman thought he was suspicious. He also wasn't shot because he was suspicious AND black. He was shot in the middle of an aggressive physical altercation. In the same way that Zimmerman (by every conceivable metric) didn't just shoot somebody because they were black and/or suspicous, I of course don't advocate shooting random people for the same reasons.
It would be beyond stupid just to go shooting everyone that looked suspicious. It's also beyond stupid that you're suggesting that I advocate that. Seriously. You sound like the Brady campaign and their "wild west" analogies. Nothing I've ever posted advocates violence without sufficient, legal cause. Stop suggesting that I'm a racist or am advocating wanton violence against black people who -according to what you suggest- are all automatically suspicious.