Unless there is proof that she ordered the killing of that cop or was the one who fired the weapon, you can not convict her of murder. Even though you have a different set of rules, that's not how our justice system works. It's not how most people think. It was one of the guys who killed the cop - the same one that the witness saw fighting him. She didn't have any evidence, not even gunpowder residue. People want to hate her because she challenged authority and that scares people.
People "want to hate her" because she was the leader of a terrorist organization that regularly robbed, murdered, and bombed people. When you are the leader of a terrorist organization that kills people, those murders are on you even if you don't pull the trigger. By your logic, people just wanted to hate on Osama Bin Laden because he challenged authority and that scares people.....he never hurt anyone directly either.
The Black Panthers (the original) were not a hate group.... I really wish you would stop with some of this non-sense you keep texting... T_Man
BG they wouldn't have put themselves out there like that if it was propaganda this has been going on for awhile this is nothing new to those that have been through it or have seen it before just because you live in a house that is blind to the fact that color bias has been going on for years now is your fault you can keep blaming PRESIDENT OBAMA all you want those other DB want there has been a lot of what has been going on exposed now so deal with it in your petty way you have been but it real and has been before Obama got in office he hasn't made it worse camera phone have.
Yeah....they really were. They weren't as radical as the Black Liberation Army which was a terrorist organization, but that doesn't mean that they weren't still a hate group full of racists.
They were not..... The group was started to help patrol against policeman who brutally hurting blacks for no reason what so ever. The black panthers did more for the black community than most organizations.. They started health care clinics, food outreach, help with education and a lot more... So just because they could bare arms they were radical? Even when the law allowed that... See you keep trying to change history for your own benefit and you keep trying to spread this bull crap and have no ideal of what you're talking about. Tell me Bobby... Have you ever been chased by the KKK for the color of your skin? I HAVE... Have you ever been pulled over by the police for doing nothing wrong and slammed on top of a car because of the color of your skin? I HAVE... I have served my country proudly and I don't condone the violence that has happen with the civilians or with the police.... Wrong is freaking wrong.. But you are another David Irving, basically trying to re-write history to meet your benefit and not telling the entire story... T_Man
The leaps in logic you are taking here are huge. Pretty dangerously close to defending racist cop targeting terrorists also.
Nope just defending the black panther movement because apparently a culmination of 400 years of experience explicit institutionalized racism isn't enough 'tyranny' for black people to utilize the second amendment for the intended purpose if fighting government tyranny... Or we can just laugh at the entire notion that the second amendment rationally is a means to defeat government tyranny precisely because of the loose subjective term 'tyranny'. And no, I'm not even close to defending the shooting of innocent cops. Shut the **** up with these stupid holier than thou premature accusations. What do you think 'fighting government tyranny utilizing the second amendment" looks like to you?
You are using this as an example of fighting government tyranny which elevates it up to the level of legitimacy. It is a massive leap in logic AND close to defending the actions in one move. You are trying to legitimize it for some irrelevant second amendment argument bashing. It isn't a good avenue of attack. To argue government tyranny when "the government" was taking pictures with the protesters is asinine. Many governments (ones that aren't even considered tyrannical) don't allow any sort of assembly.
How am I legitimizing shooting innocent cops if I find the ENTIRE NOTION of defeating government tyranny with firearms asinine in the first place? Honestly, What do you think fighting government tyranny with the second amendment looks like?
You are (coming close to) legitimizing the shooting because you find the notion ridiculous and are using a poor example to show it. Elevating this poor example to legitimacy. It isn't a defense, it is your motivation The first requirement is a tyrannical government.
I'm referring to the Black Panther party and their rights to utilize the second amendment to fight 'tyranny' that according to white conservatives is the primary intention of the second amendment. If white colonists felt that unequal representation and unfair taxes/tariffs were grounds for 'tyranny' and thus rebellion, then why can't black people from the 1960's who their ancestors and themselves have experienced 400 consecutive years of explicit legitimate tyranny either through slavery, racist government and business polices such as segregated schools that received **** funding, denying of housing loans, EXPLICIT police brutality etc. utilize the second amendment the way white conservatives think it was meant for?
So black people were not experiencing a tyrannical government primarily at the state and local level up to the 1960's in the United States? Forget about the 300 years of slavery. What about the Black Codes and Jim Crow laws up to the 1960's? Wasn't that tyrannical? Did that mean the Black Panthers had a right to use the second amendment to fight tyranny?
