Police

Sheriff Says "Two Seeds" and "Shakings" Justify Doonesbury-Style Roadside Hassle

|

Sheriff Robert Arnold
Sheriff Robert Arnold

A long time ago, long enough ago that Doonesbury was actually funny, Garry Trudeau penned a bit in which Zonker Harris was busted on a cross-country trip after highway patrolmen found a couple of "marijuana seeds" in his possession. I thought of that strip when Sheriff Robert Arnold (that's his mug, to the right) of Rutherford County, Tennessee, insisted that the roadside hassling of libertarian college student, Chris Kalbaugh, was justified because Deputy A.J. Ross supposedly found marijuana shakings and two marijuana seeds in the car.

Two seeds? Kalbaugh must be a dealer!

But as the college student points out, "They did not even confirm to see if it was. They did not test it."

So the cops might have found shake and two marijuana seeds (two!), or they may have found some dried, unidentified plant matter and a couple of chipmunk turds. Too bad they didn't give it the old taste test.

For the record, I know what shake looks like. I've seen a lot of marijuana in my years. But give it some time to age and dry, and I'll be damned if I could distinguish it from whatever has blown into the map pocket and the upholstery of my Ford Explorer (the "shakings" were found in Kalbaugh's door handle and the "seeds" in his back seat).

Sheriff Arnold should give some thought to the idea that coming off sillier than a '70s-era comic strip character doesn't build his credibility.

And Kudos to the Libertarian Party of Tennessee for putting together an organized effort to monitor the police.

Advertisement

NEXT: Justice Department to Consider Civil Rights Charges Against Zimmerman

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. K-9s have 100% accuracy “alerting” on drugs. If the officer can’t find anything it must be “shake”.

    1. “K-9s have 100% accuracy “alerting” on drugs”

      You bet!
      ‘Duke! Do you smell something there? Sure you do, Duke! Just bark once! Good boy!’

  2. Like Dunphy said, it’s all attitude. The law is applied based upon the judgement of the person enforcing it. If he likes you, then you might get it easy. If you fail to show sufficient respect, then you will be treated much more harshly. If you fail to show any respect, then you just might bet a beating.

    This is what is known as Rule of Law. Not to be confused with Rule of Man.

    1. If you fail to show any respect, then you just might get a beating tazed or shot.

      fixed

    2. And god help you if you have had a dog.

  3. OT but I thought relevant: http://topconservativenews.com…..ed-attack/

    I expect the Obama Administration and the Media to treat this case as fairly as they did the Zimmerman case.

    1. It was self-defense! They stood their ground! They did not retreat!

    2. dog bites man

    3. Wow, what an openly bigoted site.

      And just how big a police state do you conservatives want to police interracial crime? Do you want a law to force the “biased” media to trumpet these crimes?

      Hey, I know – call it The Fairness Doctrine.

      1. PB says “two seeds and some shakings” proof of Hate Crimes punishable by time in the Federal Galag.

        Remember PB, if you see something, say something. That’s the only way you can stamp this shit out. You might get an atta-boy or a promotion from paid sock puppet to salaried enforcer.

      2. And just how big a police state do you conservatives want to police interracial crime? Do you want a law to force the “biased” media to trumpet these crimes?

        No one in this thread has claimed that they should be tried with a hate crime. The argument is that this is a more obvious hate crime than the Zimmerman case, yet your boy Obama and other leftists will ignore this.

        The argument is against left-wing hypocrisy, not in favor of hate crime statutes.

        1. The very idea of a “hate” crime is absurd and notice I never used the term.

          I was referring to the site ‘Duke’ linked and its obsession with interracial crime – in particular black on white crime.

          So, what is the conservative answer to deal with interracial crime?

          Don’t try to slip out of this one.

          1. What the fuck are you talking about? He linked to the site because the particular article is of relevance to the issue of race in America, and is also somewhat germane to the Martin/Zimmerman case. Whether or not the site is racist is of no relevance to what Duke was saying.

            So, what is the conservative answer to deal with interracial crime?

            I don’t know because I’m not a conservative. What I do know is that the left is far more obsessed with interracial crime than the right tends to be, so why aren’t you calling your prog buddies racist?

            Don’t try to slip out of this one.

            What am I trying to slip out of? You’re arguing I’m a racist based on like 4th degree guilt by association.

            1. Just let it go. There is nothing you can say that will penetrate it’s shield of retard.

            2. No, both sides go nuts on race and crime. This very site did on the Zimmerman case.

              I have repeatedly stated that I never cared about this trivial little case. I am just glad the damn thing has ended.

              1. This site went nuts over a clearly politically-motivated case of prosecutorial overreach.

                Unless commenting about the extent to which race-baiting poisons rational minds is evidence of race obsession, in which case, sure, this website is nuts.

                1. Second-degree murder was overreach but not manslaughter.

                  Nevertheless the verdict is reasonable.

                  1. Really? Cause I’m pretty sure the whole idea of “self defense” kinda negates the whole manslaughter thing. But you know, I guess it’s all about how you feel.

                  2. Second-degree murder was overreach but not manslaughter.

                    Which the prosecution did not ask for until the jury was about to go in to deliberations and knew that their case was in the shitter with the jury.

              2. Palin’s Buttplug| 7.14.13 @ 9:49PM |#
                “No, both sides go nuts on race and crime. This very site did on the Zimmerman case.”

                See? Other people are as brain-dead as I am! See?’
                Especially when it isn’t true.
                Dipshit, your fantasy world is something to behold. Go fuck your daddy

              3. Palin’s Buttplug| 7.14.13 @ 9:49PM

                “No, both sides go nuts on race and crime. This very site did on the Zimmerman case.”

                Ah, see here’s our problem. When PB talks about racial crime he means something different than when we do.

                When *we* talk about racial crimes, we’re talking about crimes with a racial motivation. When *he* talks about racial crimes he’s talking about crimes (or anything remotely violent, like self-defense) committed by whites on non-whites.

                1. “When *he* talks about racial crimes he’s talking about crimes (or anything remotely violent, like self-defense) committed by whites on non-whites.”

                  He’s also posting about how he can find someone as stupid as he is promoting another political view.
                  I’m sure he can, but it’ll take some searching for that level of stupid, and it’s irrelevant besides.
                  But, hey, it’s dipshit!

                  1. I’ve had a recent thought today, after hearing on some talking-head show that the black community’s main source of anger about Trayvon is the fact he was “profiled.”

                    I’m thinking that most of the people most angry about the whole situation have never lived in a small bedroom community, gated or not. For people who do, they tend to know just about every one of their neighbors, or at least they recognizes most people. If they see a young man acting suspiciously that they don’t recognize, they get concerned. It’s not necessarily because he’s black, but more the fact that he’s a young man who doesn’t appear to have a good reason to be there, and that might mean trouble.

                    I think most outrage comes from city dwellers who have nothing but strangers on their streets, and thus can’t understand why there would even be something like a “neighborhood watch” or anyone worrying about a stranger poking about. It doesn’t make sense to them that there is private property, instead of alleys and sidewalks, where you might not want someone you don’t know walking in your back yard. And, of course, to many city residents there is nothing more pathetic than the suburbs, so no reason to try to think that anyone living there could be anything but a racist.

          2. “So, what is the conservative answer to deal with interracial crime?”

            Why is “interracial crime” any different than any other crime?

            Interracial crime isn’t even particularly frequent. Whites overwhelmingly murder whites, and blacks overwhelmingly murder blacks.

            If there is anything to get worked up about statistically it’s that young African American males have a murder rate ten times (!) as high as other groups. That is something only the African American community itself can fix.

            1. “That is something only the African American community itself can fix.”

              I kinda feel like the whole WoD issue makes holding hands and singing kumbayah pretty unlikely.

      3. The most openly racist comentator sock puppet on Reason is shocked to find racism.

        Remember shreek is the guy who hates Clearance Thomas because he married a white woman. Shreek is about as vile and disgusting a racist as they come.

        1. You’re lying again.

          My only comment about Thomas was that he was an affirmative action hire.

          1. Is it affirmative action when he’s the most qualified justice on the bench (and I know that’s not saying much, and I regularly disagree with his opinions, but he nonetheless is generally the most consistent and well-reasoned SCOTUS judge)?

          2. And that he had a white wife. And of course you think he was one. You think he is stupid because he is black. Why you are not banned for that shit is beyond me.

              1. Nice comeback!

      4. And just how big a police state do you conservatives want to police interracial crime?

        I thought it was you progtards that pushed hate crime laws. *checks facts*

        Yep, it’s you Prog Obamatards who push that.

      5. I want a state just large enough to respond to violent assaults and robberies.

        During the 19th century, the state got that done spending less than 5% of GDP.

        Is that specific enough an answer for you?

        1. Then we agree.

          ‘Duke’ was implying that conservatives must do something about interracial crime.

          What this “do something” is is very unclear. Martial law? Arrest all black people under 30? Duke and the conservative bloc have something in mind.

          John? Sevo? Translate for Duke please.

          1. I’m thinking we confiscate property of people we don’t like, like your hero Soros did to the Jews while he worked for the Nazis. We already have that in the drug war, confiscate property of people who use and do drugs. So Miss Buttplug should be at least pleased with that step in the right direction.

            The Left is losing its grip on power and is in convulsions right now because people are finally seeing them for what they are — lying, immoral, racist elitists who do far more damage than they do good.

    4. This shit happens a lot, I’m pretty sure “kick the shit out of some white guy” is part of their initiation.

    5. Shouldn’t we riot or something? I have been looking at 70 inch flat screens.

  4. Thank God we have the cops keeping the streets safe from drug pushers like this scumbag.

  5. That dude clearly has way too much time on his hands.

    http://www.Privacy-Web.com

  6. The sheriff is a retarded fucking joke, as is anyone who supports this shit.

  7. I read a Doonesbury collection from the 1970s once. It was like reading an illustrated version of The Washington Post’s Watergate coverage. Funny? Let’s not get carried away. It was wry in its own way, I guess.

    Also, it’s official. My new goal in life smoke a legal joint with Tooch. We’ll have to hustle to fit it into the window between when it goes from prohibited to mandatory.

    1. Cancer| 7.14.13 @ 8:30PM |#
      “I read a Doonesbury collection from the 1970s once. It was like reading an illustrated version of The Washington Post’s Watergate coverage. Funny? Let’s not get carried away. It was wry in its own way, I guess.”

      I dunno.
      Trudeau started with a view skeptical of government power, and then, in an obvious example of Nick’s article ( https://reason.com/blog/2013/07…..n-why-gove ) he adopted or continued his view that the solution to bad government was more government oversight.
      Remember he was an ‘instant success’ at an age of ‘stupid’, so the obvious incentive was: “I’m right! I need to keep doing this!”
      Stupid begat stupid.

      1. Yes, in the 70’s Doonesbury was a lot more anti-government, although of course they had Nixon to hate. The theme was still way left, though, especially his treating John Kenneth Galbraith like a god.

  8. Well, I’m always very careful about where I put my seed in the back seat, so I’m not worried.

    1. I’m always very careful about where I put my seed …

      Usually in a sock at the bottom of the hamper.

      1. Certainly not on the ground!

        1. You know what the Catholics have to say about this?

  9. I’ve seen a lot of marijuana in my years.

    That still doesn’t justify reading Doonsebury.

  10. The glories of single-payer healthcare:

    13,000 died needlessly at 14 worst NHS trusts

    The NHS’s medical director will spell out the failings of 14 trusts in England, which between them have been responsible for up to 13,000 “excess deaths” since 2005.

    Prof Sir Bruce Keogh will describe how each hospital let its patients down badly through poor care, medical errors and failures of management, and will show that the scandal of Stafford Hospital, where up to 1,200 patients died needlessly, was not a one-off.

    ?Show that the warning signs were there for managers and ministers to see, including alarming levels of infections, patients suffering from neglect and appalling blunders such as surgery performed on the wrong parts of bodies.

    1. We will never go to single-payer here. The insurers call the shots.

      1. Even more so now that Obamacare gave them that huge bailout!

      2. Palin’s Buttplug| 7.14.13 @ 9:21PM |#
        “We will never go to single-payer here. The insurers call the shots.”

        Regardless of the validity of your claim, I’m sure you’re disappointed, dipshit.

        1. No, I like my health care insurer. I am keeping them.

          1. Not if Obozo his way.

          2. You like them but they call the shots. ok.

            1. PB has a problem with authority – he *likes* being told what to do.

          3. No, I like my health care insurer. I am keeping them.

            Bullshit, Obama supporters told me that kajillions across the land aren’t insured.

      3. Yeah, so do the insurers in the UK. Only the insurers in the UK are one insurer – the government.

      4. Yeah, so do the insurers, or should I say *insurer*, in the UK – the government.

      5. We will never go to single-payer here. The insurers call the shots.

        Given what I’ve seen from the NHS, the obvious response to that is, “thank fucking god”

  11. How will this sheriff deal with the upcoming “sharknado”?

    1. We must develop strong Jaeger’s. Duh.

      1. Evas damnit!

        1. I’d prefer some Gundam suits…

          1. The wife and I just got back from Pacific Rim. Pretty fucking awesome.

            1. The wife and I are at a standstill for our next movie. I want to see Pacific Rim. She wants to see that movie with the dead people who hunt souls or whatever.

              1. Pacific Rim was really, really good. Zombies are over. Mecha suits is whey it’s at!!!

              2. The wife and I are at a standstill for our next movie. I want to see Pacific Rim. She wants to see that movie with the dead people who hunt souls or whatever Ryan Reynolds’ abs.

                FIFY.

                1. Yeah, those. The man looks rather fantastic.

                  I’ll be honest…I’m trying to get my Mom to go because she likes Jeff Bridges & I’ve almost forgiven Ryan for Green Lantern at this point.

                  1. I’ll be honest…I’m trying to get my Mom to go because she likes Jeff Bridges & I’ve almost forgiven Ryan for Green Lantern at this point.

                    Ryan did Smokin’ Aces so he’s got some capital stashed away.

                    1. ^ this.

  12. OT: I figured that after this weekend, an article that somewhat restores one’s faith in humanity might be nice

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new…..BIKES.html

    1. Thanks, C. That does perk up a Sunday evening.

    2. Awesome.

    3. WGAL reports the man was wearing green shoes and green pants with a red and white striped shirt at the time of the abduction, and that he walks with a limp.

      I’d wish them luck finding the guy, but I doubt they’ll need it.

      1. The kidnapper is one of Santa’s Elfs?

        1. An evil renegade elf, like the evil renegade Shaolin monks from the kung-fu movies.

      2. I noticed that. Not exactly the most inconspicuous outfit to be wearing when committing any crime, let alone the kind of crime that results in the most public awareness of the suspect’s description.

        1. Yeah, he could have just worn a sweatshirt with his address on it.

      3. Did he have a cane and a jaunty hat?

        1. Nm I found him

          1. He sure is a slippery fella

            1. Where’s Comrade Waldo?

    4. No, no, no, we can’t be having any of this.

      1. What if someone had gotten hurt or killed?

      2. We don’t want citizens to think and act for themselves – we need to up the “police first” indoctrination.

      3. These kids should be liable for lost wages for the union workers who did not get called (or get overtime) in to deal with this crime.

      1. I love how the cops are like “It’s possible he may have abandoned the girl after he saw these kids following him …” No! It’s just a coincidence these guys were right behind him when he happened to let the girl out of his car two hours after abducting here

    5. That’s a horrible story.

      Those wanna be heros (self styled batmen) got lucky that they didn’t cause the little girl’s death. They should have called the cops and then gone home to hide until the real heros acted.

      / proglodyte

  13. I like how the sheriff is affecting a Clint Eastwood squint. I bet his wife, Morgan Fairchild, eats it up.

    1. *slow clap*

    1. That is fucked up.

      1. It’s late in DC John. Go to sleep. 😉

      2. I know, don’t they realize Betty’s meant for Midge?

        1. That is what I always thought.

    2. Damn SIV, I just cheered the place up, and now you have to post this

    3. Yeah, that story has been a local sensation in Southern California. I’m really hoping the brother accidentally killed him and tried to cover up the death because the idea of sociopathy in children depresses me.

      Had not heard about the psychic angle until now though.

    4. Body of Autistic Boy With Two Mommies Recovered Thanks To Psychic: Murdered By Half-Brother. Father Denies Autism

      Seance on a Wet Afternoon is on the TCM schedule Monday night at 11:00 PM.

    5. Wait, so the boy was XXY?

    6. Soon psychics will replace drug dogs in establishing probable cause.

  14. WASHINGTON ? When President Obama proclaimed that those who commit sexual assault in the military should be “prosecuted, stripped of their positions, court-martialed, fired, dishonorably discharged,” it had an effect he did not intend: muddying legal cases across the country.
    In at least a dozen sexual assault cases since the president’s remarks at the White House in May, judges and defense lawyers have said that Mr. Obama’s words as commander in chief amounted to “unlawful command influence,” tainting trials as a result. Military law experts said that those cases were only the beginning and that the president’s remarks were certain to complicate almost all prosecutions for sexual assault.

    What a maroon. I could almost forgive Obama for being stupid. It is not like his supporters are bright enough to know better. But it is that he thinks he is so smart. Shutting up is just not how he rolls.

    1. Hubris. That’s how he rolls.

    2. Since when do the proggie griefers give a shit about due process? Especially for thoughtcrime (Zimmerman) and crimes against feminism (Duke Lacrosse).

    3. Shutting up is just not how he rolls.

      If only.

      Usually smart people are the first ones to shut the fuck up about shit they know naught about.

      1. Wow did I misread that. I thought you said “shutting up is how he rolls.”

    4. …”it had an effect he did not intend:”…
      If we give him a really big caliber pistol, and he blows both feet off, will he quit and shut up?

      1. Wishful thinking.

    5. I hate BO as much as anyone, but that’s a really easy mistake to make. I hope you don’t disagree with BO’s statement there, btw.

      1. Smart fucking lawyer,huh?

  15. And fucking meanwhile:

    Chief-Peeping-Tom-and-Drone-Assassin Obama phones Putin and demands Russia hand over Snowden for imprisonment, torture and a show trial ending in the death penalty.

    http://news.yahoo.com/obama-sp…..18708.html

    1. Wow, how could you *not* agree to those terms?

      1. State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said it would raise concerns in the U.S.-Russian relationship if Moscow were to accept an asylum request from Snowden.

        “However we are not at that point yet. They still have the opportunity to do the right thing and return Mr. Snowden to the United States and that’s what our hope is,” she told reporters.

        Why should Russia seize Snowden and force him to return to the United States? What crime has he been charged with? What court has he been charged in?

        1. The Court of FuckYouThatsWhy

    2. If I was Putin I would seat Snowden right next to Obama at the G20 summit.

      1. That would be so epic. And if there’s any world leader who would do it, it would be Putin

  16. Never go full retard, Emily Bazelon.

    “It feels wrong, this verdict of not guilty for George Zimmerman. It feels wrong to say that Zimmerman is guilty of no crime. If he hadn’t approached 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, if he hadn’t pulled his gun, Martin would be alive.

    Wow, Emily saw the whole thing to down! Why didn’t she testify? Unless she’s just making shit up and basing her legal dressing-down of Florida on counterfactuals and hypotheticals that suits her team’s preferred narrative.

    And the kicker:

    Emily Bazelon is a Slate senior editor and writes about law, family, and kids. She is also the Truman Capote Fellow at Yale Law School and a contributing writer for the New York Times Magazine. Her new book is Sticks and Stones: Defeating the Culture of Bullying and Rediscovering the Power of Empathy and Character. Find her at emilybazelon@gmail.com or on Facebook or Twitter.

    I’d ask what law school would associate with someone who publishes such shit about jurisprudence, but Yale makes sense.

    1. Hey ASM, you’re a PoliSci guy right? You planning on law school?

      1. I’m open to it in the future, but not right now. I’m looking for internship work mostly. I’m undecided about what kind of career to pursue.

        1. Roger that. You’ve got a good brain. Lawyering could be good for you.

          1. Thank you. I view law school as an investment on myself, but the amount of debt I’d have to compile to get a law degree does frighten me.

    2. “It feels wrong, this verdict of not guilty for George Zimmerman. It feels wrong to say that Zimmerman is guilty of no crime.

      Because, you know, the law is all about how you feel.

      Jesus fuck, that’s too retarded to even comprehend. How can this woman find gainful employment being this dumb?

      1. Well apparently she is actually too stupid to practice law so she writes for industrial grade stupid media sources.

        Just to punch the other nut – she probably makes more than you and I combined.

        1. Reminds me of the woman I went to medical school with, whose husband was “Official Poet of the Longshoremen’s Union.” Really.

          1. Jeez, now I’m trying to compose union poetry in my head. Let’s see, what would the plumbers wax poetic?

            1. “Ode to a Buttcrack”

              WARNING: DO NOT GIS

    3. It feels wrong to say that Zimmerman is guilty of no crime.

      Gee, Emily, I could say that about a whole *bunch* of people.

      1. No you can’t.

    4. Defeating the Culture of Bullying

      Her preferred method: breaking the bullies’ hands with your face.

    5. Because we all know that how it feels is totally the bar for how we should apply the law. Bazelon is in a daily competition for Lithwick for America’s dumbest legal commentator. She set the bar pretty high on this one.

      And what the fuck is the Truman Capote Fellow at the Yale Law School? That sounds like the Salvador Dali Fellow at Fermi Lab.

      1. And what the fuck is the Truman Capote Fellow at the Yale Law School?

        Obviously some award they give to retards.

    6. “Emily Bazelon is a Slate senior editor and writes about law,”

      Under the theory that stupidity at Slate should not be isolated, why don’t they get her to write about, oh, nuclear physics? NASCAR? Paper napkins?
      I mean there’s a whole lot of stupid to be mined there!

    7. Well, to an extent she’s right – if Zimmerman just minded his own business then none of this would have gone down.

      Of course there’s a good chance the Martin would have gone on to rob somebody’s home, but hey – he’d still be alive.

      1. Unless the homeowner was packing.

  17. http://photosilke.blogspot.co……tored.html

    Amazing photos of America in the early 20th Century. It just astounding how well kept up everything looks, given that there wasn’t a giant federal government. It turns out that Somalia is deceptively clean and organized.

    1. I think that’s just a byproduct of the “black & white” photos.

    2. LOL at 38

      1. He’s already surrendered.

        1. I like picture #40, Asbury Park New Jersey Shore in 1905. You can see a young Bruce Springsteen in a sailor suit.

    3. In all the photos I could only find a handful of obese people.

      1. Back in those days you needed money to be able to overeat.

        1. Sorry but the state pays for most of those big fat asses:

          Connection Between Social Welfare Participation, Gender and Obesity in America

    4. Dude, those are awesome. Thanks for the link.

    5. Number 51 must be doctored because it shows an electric street car in Birmingham, Alabama and I have it only good authority from ThinkProgress that it was FDR that gave those redneck Southerners electricity.

      1. Fun Fact:

        “The Capital City Street Railway, also known as the Lightning Route, was the first city-wide system of [electric] streetcars established in Montgomery, Alabama, United States on April 15, 1886.”

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning_Route

        1. And it was desegregated until the city council passed an ordinance mandating segregation.

          It’s almost as if Rand Paul is on to something about private businesses and discrimination…

          1. He’s not just on to something, he’s talking about something that’s absolutely known and documented, but widely ignored.

    6. Those photos are spectacular. I like #015, woman in her Sunday best, shooting a Winchester at something in the water.

      No one on boat hyperventilating about guns. No SWAT team on shore waiting to kill her dog and beat her to death.

  18. Give me just a couple minutes, or days…

    and I am turning this into the Libertarian theme song…

    BOC, Teen Archer, she will cry for me…

    1. THIS is the libertarian theme song.

      1. Gotcha on guitar solos. Shouldn’t the Libetarian theme song have badass guitar solos?

        1. Revolution has radical libertarian lyrics and the music is basically a cover of the MC5’s Black To Comm

      2. Needs moar cowbell.

  19. LIVE VIDEO: LAPD Fires Bean Bags at Protesters

    1. Hard to find the good guys here, but blocking a freeway over a not-guilty verdict seems hard to fathom,
      Especially, from the comments:
      “We are literally walking on the 10 freeway for Trayvon Martin!”
      Mmmkay

      1. I wonder if these same protesters blocked any freeways over OJ’s verdict.

        1. Uhhh, OJ was innocent, so there was nothing to protest.

  20. J.K. Rowling outed as author of ‘debut’ detective novel, The Cuckoo’s Calling

  21. Noah. even though Sharon`s report is really cool, last saturday I bought a gorgeous Nissan GT-R: after making $9096 this – 5 weeks past and-in excess of, 10-k last-month. with-out a doubt this is the easiest work Ive ever had. I actually started 9-months ago and practically straight away startad bringin in over $77, p/h. , Go to site and open Home for details
    http://WWW.JOBS31.COM

  22. Trayvon Martin protest in Times Square

    http://twitter.com/TRAPAHOLICS…..00/photo/1

    1. Yep, look there. Some folks are unhappy that a prosecutor didn’t prove his case. Or they’re really, really pissed at the 6 women who formed the jury.
      Or maybe they’re just not that cognizant of what went on?
      I’m guessing the third, and also guessing that there isn’t a coherent intent in the lot of them.

    2. Self-involved dbags. It’s just an opportunity for them to hang out, feel self-righteous and listen to music.

      1. It’s just an opportunity for them to hang out, feel self-righteous and listen to music.

        That’s called “Wednesday” at my house.

  23. I’ve been thinking about the president’s statement on the verdict:

    The death of Trayvon Martin was a tragedy. Not just for his family, or for any one community, but for America. I know this case has elicited strong passions. And in the wake of the verdict, I know those passions may be running even higher. But we are a nation of laws, and a jury has spoken. I now ask every American to respect the call for calm reflection from two parents who lost their young son. And as we do, we should ask ourselves if we’re doing all we can to widen the circle of compassion and understanding in our own communities. We should ask ourselves if we’re doing all we can to stem the tide of gun violence that claims too many lives across this country on a daily basis. We should ask ourselves, as individuals and as a society, how we can prevent future tragedies like this. As citizens, that’s a job for all of us. That’s the way to honor Trayvon Martin.

    I’m sorry, but doesn’t this verdict and the evidence presented at trial pretty much show that Martin was in the wrong to attack Zimmerman and had thus committed unlawful battery against a citizen trying to keep his neighborhood safe?

    Why does the president want us to honor him like he’s some kind of martyr? He was in the wrong in this altercation.

    1. We should ask ourselves if we’re doing all we can to stem the tide of gun violence

      uh, probably no

      1. What is this world coming to when the streets are not safe for a young hothead to beat up ‘some cracker’ that’s dissin’ him?

        1. Why did the kid think he had to beat up the guy?

          1. Ummm, maybe it was his possession of an inflated macho tough guy sensibility coupled with poor impulse control and a malfunctioning decision making process.

            Nah… Couldn’t be that simple.

            Oh wait, I’ve got it! It’s “something, something, RACISM, blah blah etc” isn’t it?

            1. So I can taunt you into attacking me, shoot you, and get away with it?
              You’re on.

              1. What was the evidence that anyone was taunted into an attack?

          2. He seemed to be a homophobe who thought he was being stalked by a gay man.

            Did you really, really want to ask this question?

      2. I am. I just helped stop a bunch of morons from passing AWBs and magazine restrictions.

        1. That was actually me.

    2. I’m sorry, but doesn’t this verdict and the evidence presented at trial pretty much show that Martin was in the wrong to attack Zimmerman and had thus committed unlawful battery against a citizen trying to keep his neighborhood safe?

      No, it just means that the prosecution failed to disprove GZ’s claim of SD beyond a reasonable doubt.

      1. Yeah, I have to agree with Tulpa on this. Zimmerman being acquitted doesn’t mean that Martin was proven to be in the wrong. It just means that there wasn’t enough proof to find Zimmerman guilty.

        1. Just as the police didn’t find enough to book him and the local DA didn’t see enough to charge/indict. That is three different hurdles of “not criminally responsible” that Zimmerman cleared.

          I’m a bit surprised more wasn’t made of the evidence that Trayvon was “fag-bashing” when he attacked Zimmerman. He told Jeantel the “creepy ass cracka” might want to rape him.

      2. No, it just means that the prosecution failed to disprove GZ’s claim of SD beyond a reasonable doubt.

        Fair enough, but in any case Martin to me is not the kind of person the president should want to honor.

        Again, it’s weird that they are talking about Martin as if he were a martyr.

    3. While we are stemming the tide of gun violence, who will stem the tide of drone violence?

      1. Who will stem the tide of violence violence?

  24. George Zimmerman no jail time. Plaxico Burress served 2 years for shooting himself. America!

    1. I’m sure you’ll find plenty of people on this site who support NYC terrible gun restrictions.

      Let me know when you can link that…

  25. Well good news: George Zimmerman will get his gun back

    1. Why shouldn’t he?

      1. Because it feeeels wrong.

  26. That jsut does not make any sense at all dude. Wow.

    http://www.Privacy-Web.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.