People form opinions based on what they want the law or the facts to be, not what they actually are.
It was so obviously self-defense, you have to wonder why there was even a trial.
-
-
-
People also should develop laws based on cultural and ethical concerns, hence the apoplexy at the desolate ethical vacuum of this awful, predictable decision.
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
Because narrative > truth. Have fun in the 1860s
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
-
-
The enormous social resonance of this case could not be left unanswered. This trial removed ambiguity and served justice that many Americans sought so desperately. Hard to image social consequences had this case not been addressed in a court.
-
"Social resonance" is not a valid reason to try an obviously innocent person. Particularly when so many rioters and looters have gotten off scot free.
Keskustelun loppu
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
We are anticipating university-wide emails from our DIE offices lamenting the decision, expressing shock, telling us we need to do more against racism, reaffirming their commitment, and providing psychological services for the University-X community. Pls share!
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
-
-
That was the punishment itself.
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
-
-
So, if a group of Black Men travel to a Klan Rally, 250 miles away in a State they don't live in - and shoot anyone they consider to be a threat to themselves... I found your book to be naive and trivial. Now that I get a glimpse of the mind that produced it, I understand why.
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.