Jordan Davis Had 2 Parents, Bill Cosby!

Dantès

New member
Here for all those fools who think that two parents mean something special in the life of Black children. Guess Cosby forgot how his own son died. Two parents didn't save his son either, did it?

Stupid people say stupid damn shit!

On the Killing of Jordan Davis by Michael Dunn
The irrelevance of black life has been drilled into this country since its infancy, and shall not be extricated through the latest innovations in Negro Finishing School.
TA-NEHISI COATES
FEB 15 2014, 10:07 PM ET

Marchers in Jacksonville, Florida, protest the verdict against Michael Dunn. (Reuters)
I wish I had something more to say about the fact that Michael Dunn was not convicted for killing a black boy. Except I said it after George Zimmerman was not convicted of killing a black boy. Except the parents of black boys already know this. Except the parents of black boys have long said this, and they have been answered with mockery.

Jordan Davis had a mother and a father. It did not save him. Trayvon Martin had a mother and a father. They could not save him. My son has a father and mother. We cannot protect him from our country, which is our aegis and our assailant. We cannot protect our children because racism in America is not merely a belief system but a heritage, and the inability of black parents to protect their children is an ancient tradition.

Henry "Box" Brown, whose family was destroyed and whose children were trafficked, knew:

I stationed myself by the side of the road, along which the slaves, amounting to three hundred and fifty, were to pass. The purchaser of my wife was a Methodist minister, who was about starting for North Carolina. Pretty soon five wagon-loads of little children passed, and looking at the foremost one, what should I see but a little child, pointing its tiny hand towards me, exclaiming, "There's my father; I knew he would come and bid me good-bye...”

Spare us the invocations of "black-on-black crime." I will not respect the lie. I would rather be thought insane. The most mendacious phrase in the American language is "black-on-black crime," which is uttered as though the same hands that drew red lines around the ghettoes of Chicago are not the same hands that drew red lines around the life of Jordan Davis, as though black people authored North Lawndale and policy does not exist. That which mandates the murder of our Hadiya Pendletons necessarily mandates the murder of Jordan Davis. I will not respect any difference. I will not respect the lie. I would rather be thought crazy.

I insist that the irrelevance of black life has been drilled into this country since its infancy, and shall not be extricated through the latest innovations in Negro Finishing School. I insist that racism is our heritage, that Thomas Jefferson's genius is no more important than his plundering of the body of Sally Hemmings, that George Washington's abdication is no more significant than his wild pursuit of Oney Judge. I insist that the G.I Bill's accolades are inseparable from its racist heritage. I will not respect the lie. I insist that racism must be properly understood as an Intelligence, as a sentience, as a default setting to which, likely until the end of our days, we unerringly return.



There just isn't anything one can say about laws that provide that a person can be shot in cold blood. As this New York Times Editiorial makes convincingly clear. And forget prosecution the bart is just too damn high!

Here is the clearest explanation I have read to date as to why that is:

Self-Defense Law Complicated Jury's Job
By Lizette Alvarez

(Excerpt the link below will take you to the full story)

...

The jury did convict Mr. Dunn, 47, on three counts of second-degree attempted murder, one for each surviving teenager in the car. Jurors agreed that Mr. Dunn was trying to kill the teenagers — not to defend himself — when he got out of his car, crouched and shot several more bullets into the truck as it drove away.

By that point, the teenagers posed no threat and there was no need to continue shooting, the jurors concluded.

For that, Mr. Dunn will serve at least 60 years in prison.

But it was the much thornier accusation of premeditated murder, as well as the lesser charges automatically included in jury instructions, among them second-degree murder and manslaughter, which tripped up a jury that, by all accounts, worked hard to try to resolve its differences.

Until a juror speaks publicly about the deliberations, no one outside the 12 can know precisely what happened in the jury room. But agreeing on what constitutes a “justified” shooting — an ambiguous definition — could have been one problem, legal experts said.

This is why the Davis family and the parents of Trayvon Martin say they are joining forces with lawmakers to continue to fight to change Florida’s so-called Stand Your Ground law. George Zimmerman, who claimed self-defense, was acquitted in July of Mr. Martin’s shooting death. Under Florida self-defense laws, people can use lethal force and do not have to retreat if they “reasonably believe” it is “necessary” to save their lives or avoid great harm. The jury must, in essence, decide what a “reasonable person” would have done under similar circumstances. “The law takes the position that you have to step into the shoes of the defendant,” said Michael Band, a Miami criminal defense lawyer who was a longtime prosecutor in the city.

In court, it is the prosecutor’s burden to prove that a shooting was not self-defense. Also, whether there was a shotgun is not nearly as important under the law as whether Mr. Dunn believed he saw one and then reacted out of reasonable fear for his life. “If he really believed there was a gun, then he acted appropriately,” Mr. Band said.

The problem, Ms. Franks said, lies, in part, with the term reasonable, which is “squishy.” One person’s reasonable is another person’s overreaction. Getting 12 jurors with contrasting world views to agree on that is not a simple task — especially so in Jacksonville, which is 30 percent black, but is a conservative north Florida city. Add the racial overlay, and the case becomes more complicated. Mr. Dunn, a software developer, is white. Mr. Davis was black, as were his three companions.

In other words this law makes it damn easy to kill any fucking person you want to. Someone screwing your wife or someone telling you to go fuck yourself or someone you just don't like! And isn't that what modern civilized societies are really all about. Just taking out your gun and killing anyone you don't like?


http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/17/u...r-jury-in-michael-dunn-trial.html?ref=us&_r=0

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics...lling-of-jordan-davis-by-michael-dunn/283870/
 
Having two parents means a child will never be a victim of crime or violence? Who is arguing that?
 
Having two parents means a child will never be a victim of crime or violence? Who is arguing that?

Most people especially those with racist ideology and/or conservative views who (without even personally knowing what goes on in the Black Community) argue that one of the problems of within the black community is that there are many fatherless homes.
 
Most people especially those with racist ideology and/or conservative views who (without even personally knowing what goes on in the Black Community) argue that one of the problems of within the black community is that there are many fatherless homes.

Are you saying that it isn't a problem; because it would be nice to see you present something substantial, instead of it just being another one of your uninformed opinions.
 
Are you saying that it isn't a problem; because it would be nice to see you present something substantial, instead of it just being another one of your uninformed opinions.


Enough said. If you want to debate the issue make a thread. You know, I thought I was making some cordial headway in the other thread regarding spirituality but I see there really is no getting through you. As far as answering you, I prefer to actually discuss with someone else on a cordial on this matter.
 
Enough said. If you want to debate the issue make a thread. You know, I thought I was making some cordial headway in the other thread regarding spirituality but I see there really is no getting through you. As far as answering you, I prefer to actually discuss with someone else on a cordial on this matter.

Fuck you and being cordial.
You just want to throw out stuff, that you make up, and then try to use it as a basis to have a discussion on.
Kind of like you saying that Zimmerman got out of his car and pursued Trayvon, "after the dispatcher told him not to"; which is a fucking lie.
Try basing your "opinions" on some actual facts, instead of shit that just pops in your head.

Now if you want to be cordial, stop making shit up.
 
Just for the damn record this is my own personal definition of a "reasonable person" and what they would do in this situation. They would have waited patiently for their wife or girlfriend or companion to return to the car and then driven away without inciting an incident. That is what I think a "reasonable person" would have done. I am a fairly "reasonable person" who doesn't believe in guns or the power of guns and has never owned a gun nor will ever carry a gun and that is what I would have done. A racist with a gun and a desire to kill a black teenager would have done exactly with Michael Dunn did. And what he did is not what I believe a reasonable person would have done so I would have convicted his ass of first degree murder, because when he took that gun out of his glove box he was determined to shoot someone, and that act signified for me premeditation. And from there he started hallucinating and his hallucinations justified the cold blooded murder of Jordan Davis. And that is fucked up! I can kill anyone I want because I thought I saw something that doesn't appear to exist! Anyone who can read all this shit and think this damn law makes sense is out of their fucking mind!
 
I'll believe liberals care about dead teens when they cry about Christopher Cervini.


http://www.justplainpolitics.com/showthread.php?61005-Shooter-not-guilty-after-killing-teen-thug
 
Most people especially those with racist ideology and/or conservative views who (without even personally knowing what goes on in the Black Community) argue that one of the problems of within the black community is that there are many fatherless homes.
So it's not a problem
 
Most people especially those with racist ideology and/or conservative views who (without even personally knowing what goes on in the Black Community) argue that one of the problems of within the black community is that there are many fatherless homes.
and obviously it is, just as the economic difficulties that face single parent homes are a problem for every other racial community.....
 
apparently Dante thinks Bill Cosby said kids of two parents can never be victims of crime.

What Cosby says is that all the problems of the ghetto are a result of single parent households just like the rest of you right wingers do when you aren't being called on such ignorance, then of course you change course because that is what you do as a matter of course.
 
What Cosby says is that all the problems of the ghetto are a result of single parent households just like the rest of you right wingers do when you aren't being called on such ignorance, then of course you change course because that is what you do as a matter of course.

LMAO: dunce.
 
Let's give an equivalency...

One guy died skydiving, he had two parents, therefore all people with two parents will die skydiving! Damn your evidence that the stats prove that more people with two parents will not die skydiving... This guy did therefore all you people with two parents will die in skydiving accidents!
 
What Cosby says is that all the problems of the ghetto are a result of single parent households just like the rest of you right wingers do when you aren't being called on such ignorance, then of course you change course because that is what you do as a matter of course.


Something tells me you will not be able to produce any link that shows Cosby saying that ALL problems in ghettos stem from single parent households. Because he has not. He has pointed out the need for fathers in the ghettos to not be absentee. That a big part of the problems is that kids grow up in single parent households. Would you disagree? I think most would agree that two loving parents who are around and in their kids lives are better for the kids than one. Obviously abusive parents would be an exception.

One thing we do know for certain is that Bill Cosby NEVER, NOT ONCE stated that by having two parents, kids would never be victims of crimes.
 
Something tells me you will not be able to produce any link that shows Cosby saying that ALL problems in ghettos stem from single parent households. Because he has not. He has pointed out the need for fathers in the ghettos to not be absentee. That a big part of the problems is that kids grow up in single parent households. Would you disagree? I think most would agree that two loving parents who are around and in their kids lives are better for the kids than one. Obviously abusive parents would be an exception.

One thing we do know for certain is that Bill Cosby NEVER, NOT ONCE stated that by having two parents, kids would never be victims of crimes.

Remember, Prak is brilliant so I don't know if we are worthy of questioning anything he says.
 
Back
Top