Sunder writes:
> > http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/diallo000225_verdict.html
>
> It just goes to further confirms my long suspicions that our government isn't
> by the people/for the people at all, but rather has fascist/communist
> tendencies.
The verdict in this trial was not by "our government", but by a jury of
average Americans who were presented with all the evidence. The decision
was unanimous, and the jury was racially mixed.
Which is more likely: that 12 people pulled off the street were all
facists, or that the media, with all of their biases, presented you,
Sunder, with an inaccurate depiction of the story? Who do you think had
more facts about this case, the jury, or you? Who heard all sides of the
issue, the jury, or you?
How can you be so arrogant to think that you, relying on biased and
selected information, have a better understanding of this case than
people who spent hours and days devoted to an intense presentation of
the evidence?
> Any jurisdiction that considers pupming 41 pieces of lead in a man that
> refuses to talk to four predatory bastards isn't by any stretch of the
> immagination free.
The number of bullets is not the issue. As has been discussed here
before, any firefight involving multiple police officers is going to
produce a lot of gunfire. Once that first bullet is fired, the decision
is made to use lethal force. At that point there is no reason to hold
back, not if the officers want to survive. The only relevant issue is
whether the first bullet should have been fired. That depends on the
circumstances, and is the main issue the jury would have been faced with.
> I'm more and more tempted to vote with my feet.
That would be quite a sight for the people running the polling booths.
