Trayvon and the media
Replies
-
Possibilities:
1.) Trayvon was innocent.
2.) George Zimmerman is innocent and was defending himself.
3.) Trayvon was not innocent and attacked Zimmerman.
4.) George Zimmerman was not innocent and was not defending himself.
5.) I'm a dragon rawr...
Fact:
We don't know all of the information regarding this case (since the media has done such a poor job with distributing it), so debating this topic based upon what you've seen on television or have heard from your friend(s) is ultimately pointless given the fact that we can't be don't have all of the stringent details.
And yet you joined in with information you received from the media. If you are smart enough to be discerning and critical about second hand information you receive from the media and whomever else, why can't everyone else? Simply because they form a different opinion from you, doesn't mean they have no critical thinking skills. (your opinion being that you don't have enough information to draw a conclusion)
I can concede that I do not know all the details, and may never, but there is enough question about the situation for a probable cause arrest. And that is what I hear everyone asking for, an arrest and vetting of the evidence and the accounts using the judicial system. Surely you have no objection to that?
In any case, I don't come from the school that blames the media for thus and that. I think I have pretty good critical thinking skills and know how to seek out information. And I truly believe if the media did not get involved by reporting a news story that there wouldn't be an investigation going on now, the Sanford police had pretty much closed the case and was not providing any information to the parents. They are the ones that did a poor job. And they are the ones reporting and leaking piecemeal information. The media didn't shoot Trayvon, the media did not tell the parents that they should feel that justice wasn't served, etc, etc, etc.
And at the point that there is enough information to debate I am sure you, the proper debate authority, will let us know after you have had a conference with the Sanford police department, the parents on both sides, and the state attorney. Because surely you won't be getting any information from media or friends/acquaintances.
I am being a bit snarky, but it seemed like the best approach. Seriously though, I think the debate is healthy. I think we all should examine our core beliefs and have them challenged from time to time. I also take no issue with questioning our justice system to ensure that there is equity. Question: do you feel that there exists enough probable cause for an arrest and thorough investigation?
>"I can concede that I do not know all the details, and may never..."
That's enough said. If we don't know each and every detail about the case, why on Earth would we attempt to draw logical conclusions? There are a numerous amount of possibilities that could have arisen on the night with Trayvon and Zimmerman, but until we know everything, what's the point of debating it if information can be released in the next hour contradicting everyone's thoughts about the case?
The short answer is......................this is the debate club, it was created for any and all debates as long as people are enjoying themselves. We didn't know all the details about the Casey Anthony case but we still enjoyed debating and discussing it with each other, and when updates came in, discussion points changed. Nothing wrong with a lively debate.
Technically, nothing "wrong", but I think it does make people look foolish to debate the details of a case when they don't know the facts--whether it's this one, Casey Anthony, whatever.
They are debating the possibilities, what has come out and what has changed, the discussion updates as the information does, you will never EVER have all the facts in any case unless you were actually there and even then it can still be about intent and perception. So maybe it's foolish but it's interesting and anyone that does not want to discuss it is welcome not to.0 -
anyone that does not want to discuss it is welcome not to.
^Exactly.0 -
I just have to say it. I keep hearing people say "Until all the facts are in we can't say for sure." "You weren't there, you don't know what happened." "He's innocent until proven guilty."
You know, like everyone said regarding O.J.
:noway:0 -
So...are we ready to take a vote and move on to the sentencing stage?0
-
I just have to say it. I keep hearing people say "Until all the facts are in we can't say for sure." "You weren't there, you don't know what happened." "He's innocent until proven guilty."
You know, like everyone said regarding O.J.
:noway:
A friend and I are debating this on Facebook...his argument is "we don't know all the facts, you're basing everything off of assumptions"...uhhh...well...so is everyone else--judges, jury, law enforcement, etc. No one knows what really happened except for Zimmerman. So yes, I will base what I say off of assumptions. How that's a bad thing is beyond me. That's all anyone has to go off of. Just hopefully, everyone is doing it after educating themselves on the subject as much as possible.
0 -
A friend and I are debating this on Facebook...his argument is "we don't know all the facts, you're basing everything off of assumptions"...uhhh...well...so is everyone else--judges, jury, law enforcement, etc. No one knows what really happened except for Zimmerman. So yes, I will base what I say off of assumptions. How that's a bad thing is beyond me. That's all anyone has to go off of. Just hopefully, everyone is doing it after educating themselves on the subject as much as possible.
Precisely.
A. We can stop worrying that we're guilty of hanging the man. This isn't the trial, we're not on the jury. We can have any opinion we like on the subject. If we're later proven to be wrong, well hey it happens! The big people among us will gladly come back and admit it. But if everyone could stop acting like posting here may lead to rioting in the streets that would be swell.
B. No one will ever know the entire story except George Zimmerman. He shot the only other witness (as far as we know at this moment yada yada). That does not equal innocence. People are convicted EVERY SINGLE DAY at EVERY SINGLE TRIAL without the need for eyewitness accounts and recorded evidence of every aspect of the case. If "you weren't there, you don't know" were enough for a defense our prisons would be empty. So please stop.
C. You didn't say it about O.J. You didn't say it about Casey Anthony. Saying it now doesn't make you wise. It makes you a hypocrite.0 -
Precisely.
A. We can stop worrying that we're guilty of hanging the man. This isn't the trial, we're not on the jury. We can have any opinion we like on the subject. If we're later proven to be wrong, well hey it happens! The big people among us will gladly come back and admit it. But if everyone could stop acting like posting here may lead to rioting in the streets that would be swell.
B. No one will ever know the entire story except George Zimmerman. He shot the only other witness (as far as we know at this moment yada yada). That does not equal innocence. People are convicted EVERY SINGLE DAY at EVERY SINGLE TRIAL without the need for eyewitness accounts and recorded evidence of every aspect of the case. If "you weren't there, you don't know" were enough for a defense our prisons would be empty. So please stop.
C. You didn't say it about O.J. You didn't say it about Casey Anthony. Saying it now doesn't make you wise. It makes you a hypocrite.
Can I just quote this if my argument on Facebook continues?? I'll give you credit.
0 -
I just found "Groups" tonight, LOL, and this was the first one I have joined!
That said, I admit, I did not read all seven pages of this thread, as I am pressed for time at this minute, but do want to voice my opinion on this topic before I go....
The fact that Zimmerman has not been arrested yet, just enrages me. The fact remains, that he followed him, even when told not to, and Trayvon was a kid, armed with candy and a cell phone. If Trayvon was white, I do not think Zimmerman would have found him to be suspect and would not have started trying to play cop. This was a hate crime, plain and simple, and until we put our collective foot down and say enough, it will continue. Just look at what happned this past weekend with Jake England and Alvin Watts. Bottom line is it’s hard to imagine Zimmerman jumping to the conclusions he did if Trayvon was an unarmed white teenager. It’s also hard to fathom that England would open fire on a group of randomly targeted white people if he thought his father was killed by a white man.
Racism has to stop, the last time I checked, WE THE PEOPLE meant everybody, not just the ones that are just like you.....0 -
I just found "Groups" tonight, LOL, and this was the first one I have joined!
That said, I admit, I did not read all seven pages of this thread, as I am pressed for time at this minute, but do want to voice my opinion on this topic before I go....
The fact that Zimmerman has not been arrested yet, just enrages me. The fact remains, that he followed him, even when told not to, and Trayvon was a kid, armed with candy and a cell phone. If Trayvon was white, I do not think Zimmerman would have found him to be suspect and would not have started trying to play cop. This was a hate crime, plain and simple, and until we put our collective foot down and say enough, it will continue. Just look at what happned this past weekend with Jake England and Alvin Watts. Bottom line is it’s hard to imagine Zimmerman jumping to the conclusions he did if Trayvon was an unarmed white teenager. It’s also hard to fathom that England would open fire on a group of randomly targeted white people if he thought his father was killed by a white man.
Racism has to stop, the last time I checked, WE THE PEOPLE meant everybody, not just the ones that are just like you.....
There seems to be a double standard here. I found some information from a survery done in 1993, I know it is a bit dated but for some reason I am having trouble finding a somewhat credible source of info that is more recent.
From the U.S. Justice Department statistics survey:
Almost 1 million white Americans were murdered, robbed, assaulted or raped by black Americans in 1992, compared with about 132,000 blacks who were murdered, robbed, assaulted or raped by whites, according to the same survey.
According to the latest annual report on murder by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, most inter-racial murders involve black assailants and white victims, with blacks murdering whites at 18 times the rate that whites murder blacks.
I will NOT deny that people are targeted for race, in any form. I hate it, it blows my mind that in this day and age we still have this many issues with racism. At the same time, I am not a politically correct person and I try to keep my head out of the sand.. But it makes me furious when crime against a black person, by ANY other race is automatically a race crime. I think this is a huge contributing factor to why racism is still going strong today. Besides the obvious people with a racist agenda, you have just as many people throwing race around, dragging it into every issue and glorifying it. Whites commit crimes against blacks, blacks commit crime againsts whites and every race in between commits crimes against other races.
I believe the cause of racism is just much the fault of those constantly claiming it and using it to an advantage, such as Sharpton and Jackson, as it is those who actually live it.0 -
The state prosecutor is scheduled to make an announcement at 6 pm EST - word on the street is charges against Zimmerman are forthcoming..
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/12/us/prosecutor-in-trayvon-martin-case-to-make-announcement.html0 -
The state prosecutor is scheduled to make an announcement at 6 pm EST - word on the street is charges against Zimmerman are forthcoming..
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/12/us/prosecutor-in-trayvon-martin-case-to-make-announcement.html
Well, its about fkn time eh!0 -
I just found "Groups" tonight, LOL, and this was the first one I have joined!
That said, I admit, I did not read all seven pages of this thread, as I am pressed for time at this minute, but do want to voice my opinion on this topic before I go....
The fact that Zimmerman has not been arrested yet, just enrages me. The fact remains, that he followed him, even when told not to, and Trayvon was a kid, armed with candy and a cell phone. If Trayvon was white, I do not think Zimmerman would have found him to be suspect and would not have started trying to play cop. This was a hate crime, plain and simple, and until we put our collective foot down and say enough, it will continue. Just look at what happned this past weekend with Jake England and Alvin Watts. Bottom line is it’s hard to imagine Zimmerman jumping to the conclusions he did if Trayvon was an unarmed white teenager. It’s also hard to fathom that England would open fire on a group of randomly targeted white people if he thought his father was killed by a white man.
Racism has to stop, the last time I checked, WE THE PEOPLE meant everybody, not just the ones that are just like you.....
There seems to be a double standard here. I found some information from a survery done in 1993, I know it is a bit dated but for some reason I am having trouble finding a somewhat credible source of info that is more recent.
From the U.S. Justice Department statistics survey:
Almost 1 million white Americans were murdered, robbed, assaulted or raped by black Americans in 1992, compared with about 132,000 blacks who were murdered, robbed, assaulted or raped by whites, according to the same survey.
According to the latest annual report on murder by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, most inter-racial murders involve black assailants and white victims, with blacks murdering whites at 18 times the rate that whites murder blacks.
I will NOT deny that people are targeted for race, in any form. I hate it, it blows my mind that in this day and age we still have this many issues with racism. At the same time, I am not a politically correct person and I try to keep my head out of the sand.. But it makes me furious when crime against a black person, by ANY other race is automatically a race crime. I think this is a huge contributing factor to why racism is still going strong today. Besides the obvious people with a racist agenda, you have just as many people throwing race around, dragging it into every issue and glorifying it. Whites commit crimes against blacks, blacks commit crime againsts whites and every race in between commits crimes against other races.
I believe the cause of racism is just much the fault of those constantly claiming it and using it to an advantage, such as Sharpton and Jackson, as it is those who actually live it.
With all respect, I assume due to your photo that you are white. Most white people, whom have white families and such, do not really understand racism the way others do. Some do not even think it is a problem anymore....and that is a far cry from the truth....
I would agree with those stats, and bet they are not much different now than in the 90's anyway...but here is the key difference. When a black person robs, assults or murders a white person, it is more often or not, a crime of opportunity than directed at the race of the victim. However, a lot of times, when a black person is murdered by a white person, that person is targeted BECAUSE they are black, that is the difference....
Like I said, I highly doubt Zimmerman would have followed Trayvon around thinking he was up to no good, if he was white.....0 -
Second degree murder..
http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimmerman-charged-murder-trayvon-martin-killing/story?id=16115469#.T4X-CftSQ_QGeorge Zimmerman, the neighborhood watch captain who admits he shot unarmed Florida teenager Trayvon Martin, was charged with murder today and has been taken into custody.
The charge of second degree murder was brought by special prosecutor Angela Corey, according to the Associated Press. She is expected to announce the charges during a 6 p.m. news conference.0 -
here is the key difference. When a black person robs, assults or murders a white person, it is more often or not, a crime of opportunity than directed at the race of the victim. However, a lot of times, when a black person is murdered by a white person, that person is targeted BECAUSE they are black, that is the difference....
why does that make a difference? The victims are dead whether they were killed because of racism(kill you whitey=kill you n*****), hatred (hate you cracka=hate you n*****), greed(gimme your purse/jewelry/ipod/car), plain old violence(I need to be initiated into a gang=I need to feel big for killing a n*****).
Why does the "why" make any difference at all? Murder=murder imho. I've never understood why a criminal gets more severe penalties if they murder someone because of their race, or their job title(cops lives are more valuable than mine, apparently), than if they murder a "regular" person.
Anyone?0 -
Just watched the press conference on CNN...thank God, its about bloody time someone did something...they should let him sit around in jail a while before a bail hearing, he has been walking free WAY too long while his victim was in the ground.....0
-
here is the key difference. When a black person robs, assults or murders a white person, it is more often or not, a crime of opportunity than directed at the race of the victim. However, a lot of times, when a black person is murdered by a white person, that person is targeted BECAUSE they are black, that is the difference....
why does that make a difference? The victims are dead whether they were killed because of racism(kill you whitey=kill you n*****), hatred (hate you cracka=hate you n*****), greed(gimme your purse/jewelry/ipod/car), plain old violence(I need to be initiated into a gang=I need to feel big for killing a n*****).
Why does the "why" make any difference at all? Murder=murder imho. I've never understood why a criminal gets more severe penalties if they murder someone because of their race, or their job title(cops lives are more valuable than mine, apparently), than if they murder a "regular" person.
Anyone?
Because when a victim is choosen because of race, or religion or sexual preference, it is a HATE crime, and should be treated as such.....and hate crimes, deserve tougher punishments....0 -
If I kill you, you're dead. Whether I hated you first or not, the outcome is the same. Right?
I understand that we have invented this term "hate crime" but I don't understand WHY the motivation behind the crime makes any difference.
One example: Susan Smith: wack job drowned her kids in the bathtub because she believed she was sending their innocent souls straight to heaven. Not a crime motivated by hate, but a misguided/mentally ill version of love. She's still in jail for killing her kids. Because the "why" doesn't change the fact they're dead.
Why does the motivation behind the crime make the crime more heinous in anyone's mind?0 -
here is the key difference. When a black person robs, assults or murders a white person, it is more often or not, a crime of opportunity than directed at the race of the victim. However, a lot of times, when a black person is murdered by a white person, that person is targeted BECAUSE they are black, that is the difference....
why does that make a difference? The victims are dead whether they were killed because of racism(kill you whitey=kill you n*****), hatred (hate you cracka=hate you n*****), greed(gimme your purse/jewelry/ipod/car), plain old violence(I need to be initiated into a gang=I need to feel big for killing a n*****).
Why does the "why" make any difference at all? Murder=murder imho. I've never understood why a criminal gets more severe penalties if they murder someone because of their race, or their job title(cops lives are more valuable than mine, apparently), than if they murder a "regular" person.
Anyone?
Any crime that ends in the loss of life has hate involved in some fashion.
Was there really any murder that was derived from love? Well unless you are considering "crimes of passion" - but even then, love isn't in the vicinity when there is a loss of life (imo).0 -
If I kill you, you're dead. Whether I hated you first or not, the outcome is the same. Right?
I understand that we have invented this term "hate crime" but I don't understand WHY the motivation behind the crime makes any difference.
One example: Susan Smith: wack job drowned her kids in the bathtub because she believed she was sending their innocent souls straight to heaven. Not a crime motivated by hate, but a misguided/mentally ill version of love. She's still in jail for killing her kids. Because the "why" doesn't change the fact they're dead.
Why does the motivation behind the crime make the crime more heinous in anyone's mind?
Actually Susan Smith drowned her boys in her car and claimed she was car jacked.
I think you're referring to Andrea Yates.0 -
If I kill you, you're dead. Whether I hated you first or not, the outcome is the same. Right?
I understand that we have invented this term "hate crime" but I don't understand WHY the motivation behind the crime makes any difference.
One example: Susan Smith: wack job drowned her kids in the bathtub because she believed she was sending their innocent souls straight to heaven. Not a crime motivated by hate, but a misguided/mentally ill version of love. She's still in jail for killing her kids. Because the "why" doesn't change the fact they're dead.
Why does the motivation behind the crime make the crime more heinous in anyone's mind?
Susan Smith is in jail because she killed her boys and then blamed it in a BLACK MAN (of course), but she killed them because her boyfriend did not want children....so she sits in jail, EXACTLY where she belongs.....
If you are referring to Yates, which I believe you might be, she is NOT in jail, because she was mentally ill, so she is in a hospital, where she belongs....
Anyway, back to the main point....
The fact that someone would hate someone else enough to kill them, based only on race/sexual preference/religion is pretty disgusting, and is a different level of crime than a crime out of desperation, passion, greed or whatever else might cause one to commit a crime....to get say, mugged and killed and you happen to be a gay male, is MUCH different from being killed BECAUSE you are a gay male....there is really no other way to explain that, it is pretty cut and dry....
My guess, is that you are straight.....and white......0 -
Yes, my pictures are easily viewable on my profile. As is my married status. What does my being white/straight have to do with the question?
I did confuse the two women, pardon the mistake.
You keep insisting that it's different, but you won't say WHY it is different.
What if we're married, and you cheat on me. Then I hate you so much for it that I murder you? Is that a "hate crime"? You're still dead, and I did it because I hate you.
What if I live in the ghetto and I see you driving by in your Lexus? And I am so jealous and entitled that I decide to steal your car from you, and in theprocess, I shoot you and you die. Is that a hate crime?
In your example, the gay man's death would be prosecuted one of two very different ways, based on the motivation behind it. WHY? He's dead whether it was because of a mugging turned murder or motivated because of bigotry.
So, please, I've read it twice, I understand you believe it's different based solely on what is in the mind of the murderer at the time. Can you explain WHY it's different?
In my book, murder=murder. I do see the differences between pre-meditated and second degree, manslaughter, etc. Because in First degree, I planned it out, intending to kill you. I took purposeful action to make sure you ended up dead. That is different, in my opinion, than a fight that goes too far where I never intended for you to die.
One last compare/contrast:
1. I decide I want to kill someone. I choose a random stranger. I follow them to their home where I kill them.
2. I decide I want to kill someone gay. I choose someone gay. I follow them to their home where I kill them.
Shall these 2 scenarios be prosecuted differently? If so, WHY?0 -
Since George Zimmerman turned himself in, will he get the bounty money that was placed on him?0
-
About ****in time. Sad it took a MONTH of national outcry to do it but he's been charged at least.0
-
Yes, my pictures are easily viewable on my profile. As is my married status. What does my being white/straight have to do with the question?
I did confuse the two women, pardon the mistake.
You keep insisting that it's different, but you won't say WHY it is different.
What if we're married, and you cheat on me. Then I hate you so much for it that I murder you? Is that a "hate crime"? You're still dead, and I did it because I hate you.
What if I live in the ghetto and I see you driving by in your Lexus? And I am so jealous and entitled that I decide to steal your car from you, and in theprocess, I shoot you and you die. Is that a hate crime?
In your example, the gay man's death would be prosecuted one of two very different ways, based on the motivation behind it. WHY? He's dead whether it was because of a mugging turned murder or motivated because of bigotry.
So, please, I've read it twice, I understand you believe it's different based solely on what is in the mind of the murderer at the time. Can you explain WHY it's different?
In my book, murder=murder. I do see the differences between pre-meditated and second degree, manslaughter, etc. Because in First degree, I planned it out, intending to kill you. I took purposeful action to make sure you ended up dead. That is different, in my opinion, than a fight that goes too far where I never intended for you to die.
One last compare/contrast:
1. I decide I want to kill someone. I choose a random stranger. I follow them to their home where I kill them.
2. I decide I want to kill someone gay. I choose someone gay. I follow them to their home where I kill them.
Shall these 2 scenarios be prosecuted differently? If so, WHY?
I actually never looked at your page, I just can tell that someone who would not really have a hate crime committed against them, would not understand the need for the law!
The reason I even talked about Smith/Yates, is to make the point, that they would not, and should not, put someone in jail if the murder they committed was due to severe mental illness, as in the Yates case....they would not do that, it is just humane....
Ok, I am fairly new here, so I am not sure how to double quote and such, so I am just going to use quotation marks to answer your questions.....
"What if we're married, and you cheat on me. Then I hate you so much for it that I murder you? Is that a "hate crime"? You're still dead, and I did it because I hate you."
That is a crime of passion.....that murder would be committed in the overwhelming emotions of hurt, grief, and betrayal, that is not a hate crime....
"What if I live in the ghetto and I see you driving by in your Lexus? And I am so jealous and entitled that I decide to steal your car from you, and in theprocess, I shoot you and you die. Is that a hate crime?"
This is a botched robbery, also not a hate crime.....this would be more like second degree murder, where the PURPOSE of the crime was not murder, but a murder did, in fact, occcur. Even if the intent WAS to murder the victim to get away with the car, still not a hate crime as the main purpose of the crime was still to obtain said car.
"In your example, the gay man's death would be prosecuted one of two very different ways, based on the motivation behind it. WHY? He's dead whether it was because of a mugging turned murder or motivated because of bigotry."
The fact, that someone can be targeted, simply for just who they are, is a henious and disgusting crime. Perhaps being straight and white, you can not understand that, but it is as clear as black and white for most people....I do not really know how to explain it to make you understand, it is BECAUSE they are targeted BECAUSE of what they look like, who they pray to, or who they love.....there really is no other way to explain that. Let me try, one more time, with the same example I already used.
So, there is a home robbery, and the victim, who happens to be a gay male, is killed in the process. Is it sad that he is dead, of course. Is it a crime, OF COURSE.....is it terrible, of course. However, he just happend to be the victim, he was not a TARGETED victim.
Now, if someone goes out with the mindset, of killing a gay male, than that person has been TARGETED for who he loves, and how he lives his life. That is a grave danger to us all actually, the fact that someone might kill you, even if they do not know you, because of a certain way you live. That is the most simply way to explain it, if you still do not understand, I do not know how to break it down any easier. It is pretty basic actually, which leads me to believe if you do not understand it, it is simply because you are straight and white and have no reason to be scared of being in danger of being a victim of a hate crime......0 -
About ****in time. Sad it took a MONTH of national outcry to do it but he's been charged at least.
AMEN!!!0 -
Yes, my pictures are easily viewable on my profile. As is my married status. What does my being white/straight have to do with the question?
Actually, I tried to look now, and it is locked off to people that are not on your friends list, all I know is that you have a scale as your pic....0 -
if you do not understand it, it is simply because you are straight and white and have no reason to be scared of being in danger of being a victim of a hate crime......
Actually, I'm eighteen times more likely to be murdered by a black person, than they are to be murdered by me.
Your argument falls under the category of "ad hominem"
So, I'm not interested in debating with you any longer.
Good evening.0 -
Actually, I'm eighteen times more likely to be murdered by a black person, than they are to be murdered by me.
Racism at its finest people.0 -
if you do not understand it, it is simply because you are straight and white and have no reason to be scared of being in danger of being a victim of a hate crime......
Actually, I'm eighteen times more likely to be murdered by a black person, than they are to be murdered by me.
Your argument falls under the category of "ad hominem"
So, I'm not interested in debating with you any longer.
Good evening.
"Your argument falls under the category of "ad hominem""
I disagree
"Actually, I'm eighteen times more likely to be murdered by a black person, than they are to be murdered by me."
The rate is higher, yes, HOWEVER, the likelihood that a black person would murder you BECAUSE you are white, is pretty slim compaired to the amount of black people that are murdered by whites for being black....
I am actually seeing a clearer picture of you now.....perhaps your own racist views are the problem here.....how sad for you....
Racists and Homophobes are their own special kind of stupid, and as I have been taught over and over again, you cannot fix stupid.....
And with that, I am off to get some other things done.....as this is clearly a waste of time.......
May Zimmerman rot in jail, until he is old and then cold....like the RACIST scum he is.....0 -
Actually, I'm eighteen times more likely to be murdered by a black person, than they are to be murdered by me.
Racism at its finest people.
Exactly, glad I am not the only one that sees it!!0
This discussion has been closed.