Hal 9000

When a terrorist commits a mass murder, society bends over backward to explain how western/US policy contributed, how we need to reach out and see that these people are being marginalized by society and how we need to change our policy and belief systems to prevent sch attacks. We don't blame bombs, guns, cars or knives, we look at US policy toward these people. Maybe we should look at US/western Policy in regards to young men. I'll bet anything this kid was told from day one that he was a good for nothing piece of sh1t. I know I'll get the "boo-hoo, young men get everything" rhetoric, but (in part due to that thinking) in today's society, I can't think of anything that would make me want to be a young white man in this day and age.

The US has had the 2nd amendment since the beginning, they've also had violent movies for a long time. Video games and music have been around for some time. Kids were always bullied and always had mental issues. I think it's time to look at what has changed in the USA over the last recent years.

I think we should look at parenting and how boys are being treated these days.

As tragic as this situation is, it's not actually the 12th school shooting this year.

Most of Harvey Weinstein's affairs were consensual. The big part of the #metoo movement is about people of influence, NOT consensual relations. However, if a sitting president has an affair (with a subordinate) in the White House is not a big deal and no ones business, why is it a big deal that a guy had a consensual fling 10 years before becoming president?

When he's getting blow jobs from an intern while on the phone with other world leaders, you bet it's noteworthy.

I'm glad you asked, because the Lewinsky thing did happen to not just a guy who 10 years later would become president, but a guy who was president, who was using his stature to manipulate an intern into sexual favours and who did so while on the phone to world leaders. Anyone who can't see the difference, is willfully ignorant.

Well, this whole porn star controversy is weak. It was obviously agreed to by the woman and it didn't happen in the oval office, so i'm not sure that it's anyone's business besides Melania's.

Working people rarely volunteer for jury duty. Most jurors are unemployed, retired or civil servants. The rest of us cant afford to take the time off.

WTF are you talking about? Good grief!

Well, I'd say that there is clear evidence of armed robbery.

So, you agree that these punks were doing something worthy of criminal charges? Right?

The law should be the same for everyone - that's what we're told...right? The only possible change that I can Trudeau getting involved in is more gun laws. BTW - What should the farmer have done? What would you do? As I see it, he can do one of three things, Hide and let these punks rob him of his hard earned stuff, approach someone who has a gun empty handed or approach someone who has a gun with a gun of your own. The problem is not with "stand - your - ground" people, it's with a law that doesn't punish youth anymore.

You're delusional to think that nothing these punks did is worthy of criminal charges. I won't bother to scour the criminal code, but I guarantee there is no loophole that lets an attempted thief get away without charges.

Maybe if the potential native jurors didn't sit and talk about how they wanted to find the dude guilty before the trial began, they would've been chose for the jury. BTW - I know it's been said, but if a group of white kids did what what done, the same outcome would've happened. The only difference is, we never would've heard about it.

This is particularly true in the US, and after the Darren Wilson incident, who could blame them. The very last thing the FN's community needs is for the police to turn away from them, but that is likely to happen.

How in the world does that convince you of anything? Just because it was fake, more likely means that it was some crackpot just wanting to send a scare. If fake powder is enough to convince you that it was an inside job, then you're way out there.

Exactly, so when you stretch things to the absurd, it makes reasonable conversation impossible. You're confusing "home invasion" to a taking a claim on something that a person believes is rightfully theirs - but isn't. Next you're gonna claim that these punks were simply taking what should rightfully be theirs.

No, that's what you're doing. But okay, If I'm walking around a FN's house (on reserve or not) with intent to harm somebody, then yes, they have every right to 'stand their ground' and defend themselves. To equate this to a FN's barricade like we saw in Caledonia, is disingenuous.

Are you really trying to stretch this to land claim issues?

That old couple in Calgary who were murdered, had their RV stolen and bodies burnt beyond recognition....would those be the paranoid people you're talking about?

Geez, you almost sounded like a real person for a minute. Anyway, in any home invasion, I wouldn't blame any occupant for suspecting their safety was in question. Maybe they don't have a gun, maybe they have a knife, brass knuckles, maybe they could grab a lamp, baseball bat...who knows? When someone is in your house, all bets are off, and self preservation is the name of the game.

Clearly, the person in question wasn't paranoid, the threat was real! But, anyway that's just your opinion - right? It's hard to prove a negative. All we can know is what happened, not what didn't happen. For you make such a statement makes less sense than someone insisting that had the farmer NOT had a gun, his whole family might be dead.

Well, I'm glad you asked, because; yes, I do know that parts need redacting...because right now as we speak, the FBI is telling the democrats what redactions are needed. And, for the record, I actually hope that it's redacted and not simply rewrote.

Are you suggesting a proportional defense?