|
|
| Re: he was MURDERED (1243106) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > OTChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: he was MURDERED |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Wed Nov 26 06:46:37 2014, in response to Re: he was MURDERED, posted by The Silence on Wed Nov 26 06:21:46 2014. "race" is a construction detail. It does not make you who you are.But it determines how you will be treated by the authorities and by society at large. If you were locked in a room with two dozen parents who believed you were a pedophile who had molested their children then you would get beaten up and/or killed, and the fact that their belief was false wouldn't make you any less injured or dead. In fact, a guy in England ended up dead under exactly those circumstances. That race is a complete fiction in biology doesn't make it any less of a reality in sociology. The fact that race is socially constructed bullshit won't bring someone back to life if they're killed by someone who believes it's a biological reality. Oscar Grant was not murdered because you can not prove anyone intended to kill him. Tamir Rice was not murdered because you can not prove anyone intended to kill him. Michael Brown was not murdered because you can not prove anyone intended to kill him. Well that says it all, doesn't it? Oscar Grant was handcuffed and shot in the back of the head execution-style on video by a killer who confessed to the crime, but it wasn't murder. Tamir Rice was shot to death despite being a young child but it wasn't murder. Michael Brown was shot repeatedly from a distance with his hands in the air, begging his killer to stop but it wasn't murder. Do you believe anything is murder? Would you say that Kennedy wasn't "murdered" by Oswald because no one can prove he intended to kill him? That Lincoln wasn't "murdered" because Booth never intended to kill him? Perhaps you're going to claim that the Holocaust was a gigantic accident, because apparently you believe that "intent" can never be proven under any circumstances ever. Darren Wilson should not be indicted because he was acting in fear of another man attempting to harm him. Do you actually know what an "indictment" means? Because the reasons you offer just aren't applicable. In fact, since self-defense is an affirmative defense and Wilson confessed that he did, in fact, kill Brown, an indictment should have been guaranteed. |
|
|
|