TexasCHLforum.com

Not if you're a criminal on drugs, no. The American People have the god given right to self-defense no matter what this moron Eric Holder thinks. These "neighborhoods" were at odds with each other a long time ago. Half work. Half are entitled.

The NAACP is a hate group....as well as the Congressional Black Caucus.



http://news.yahoo.com/watch-eric-holder ... 16892.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The most obvious explanation is Holder hates Hispanics. He gave guns to criminals so they could murder hundreds of innocent hard working Mexicans. Now when a Latino defends himself, Holder rants about gun violence, despite his silence when men who look like his son murdered people in cold blood during the past 5 years.

What "sow[s] dangerous conflict in our neighborhoods" is thugs cold-cocking people and smashing their heads into the concrete.

This seems relevant, and I didn't see it anywhere else, but it seems the focus on the Zimmerman case has clearly diluted the facts.
Florida's SYG law has benefitted blacks at a disproportionate rate.

But approximately one third of Florida “Stand Your Ground” claims in fatal cases have been made by black defendants, and they have used the defense successfully 55 percent of the time, at the same rate as the population at large and at a higher rate than white defendants, according to a Daily Caller analysis of a database maintained by the Tampa Bay Times. Additionally, the majority of victims in Florida “Stand Your Ground” cases have been white.

African Americans used “Stand Your Ground” defenses at nearly twice the rate of their presence in the Florida population, which was listed at 16.6 percent in 2012.

Welcome to the Obama administration's cringe-inducing non sequitur of the week. On Tuesday, Attorney General Eric Holder continued stoking the fires of racial resentment over a Florida jury's acquittal of George Zimmerman. In an address to NAACP leaders, who are demanding federal intervention, Holder attacked Stand Your Ground self-defense laws.

All together now: Squirrel!

Michelle Malkin's column today on Townhall.com: http://townhall.com/columnists/michelle ... /page/full

Zoo wrote:The most obvious explanation is Holder hates Hispanics. He gave guns to criminals so they could murder hundreds of innocent hard working Mexicans. Now when a Latino defends himself, Holder rants about gun violence, despite his silence when men who look like his son murdered people in cold blood during the past 5 years.

And homosexuals, since apparently, the reason for TM's actions are that he thought Z was a homosexual.

I read this today, which implicated Eric Holder. To be honest, I don't know how much he had to do with the decision to run up the charges on these 3.
Basically a nun and two hippies... No, this isn't a joke, cut some fencing on a US nuclear weapons facility in order to put up protest signs. All 3 are very honest about what they did and confessed.

It's gone from simple misdemeanor trespass (up to 1 year in prison) to a series of charges handed down by the US escalating the charges several times up to sabotage. They now face 35-years in prison each. This is likely a death sentence if convicted at full term.

Personally, if 3 people with non-intent manage to penetrate a US nuclear facility, we should pin a metal on their backs and thank them for the wake up call. Clearly, security is doing it wrong.
I know many of you guys are OK with hanging the hippies, but here's here's where you're going to be bothered:
1) One of these people is an 82 year old nun.
2) Their intent was to follow the words of Isaiah 2:4 (per their statements)



Ref: https://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/05/15-7" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Once again, waste my tax dollars...

Another winner from the Department of Injustice and the Obamanation. All these Uber-Conservative fools had better wake up this next election and vote for the least offensive canidate not sit out another one playing with the few marbles they have left. We dang sure don't need to empower a second comming of the Clintons after this band of gangsters. There will be no country left to reclaim, I fear.

cb1000rider wrote:I read this today, which implicated Eric Holder. To be honest, I don't know how much he had to do with the decision to run up the charges on these 3.
Basically a nun and two hippies... No, this isn't a joke, cut some fencing on a US nuclear weapons facility in order to put up protest signs. All 3 are very honest about what they did and confessed.

It's gone from simple misdemeanor trespass (up to 1 year in prison) to a series of charges handed down by the US escalating the charges several times up to sabotage. They now face 35-years in prison each. This is likely a death sentence if convicted at full term.

Personally, if 3 people with non-intent manage to penetrate a US nuclear facility, we should pin a metal on their backs and thank them for the wake up call. Clearly, security is doing it wrong.
I know many of you guys are OK with hanging the hippies, but here's here's where you're going to be bothered:
1) One of these people is an 82 year old nun.
2) Their intent was to follow the words of Isaiah 2:4 (per their statements)



Ref: https://www.commondreams.org/view/2013/05/15-7" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Once again, waste my tax dollars...

I agree that their activities highlighted some egregious gaps in security ops at Oak Ridge. And they're old...does that excuse what they did? They did trespass, yes and damage property in excess of $1000 X 2, yes, total damage was $8,500. That's 16 years. From the looks of all of them, still a potential life in prison sentence. Even the 35 years isn't a death sentence CB, no one is executing them, it's life in prison, leave the hyperbole to professionals like MSM journalists.
What about the sabotage charge? Did they have the means to damage equipment and impair production or safety? Tools like hammers and bolt cutters? As you noted, they stated(anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law)they went with the intent to damage, end, erase Y-12 production, the whole beating into plowshares thing. Their intent was sabotage, that they were not able or perhaps were not willing in the end to penetrate Y-12 doesn't change that fact.
A Catholic Nun and 2 Hippies, yeah right. The 2 "hippies" are Veterans, ne're do well drifters, living in perhaps the most radical communes extant in the U.S. "Catholic Workers" House. When formed during the 1930s these communes espoused the communist ideal of the redistribution of wealth, as well as the a non-violence agenda in support of Uncle Joe.
As times changed so to the "Workers". They now consider themselves Christian Anarchists. "All authority comes from God; and the state, having by choice distanced itself from Christian perfectionism, forfeited its ultimate authority over the citizen." These communes are not organs of the Church, nor are they recognized by the Church in any way. That there is a petition for canonization of Dorothy Day, one of the founders, irks more than a few folks that are aware of what her organization was and has become.
Sister Megan was raised in a household that not only supported the "Catholic Workers" ideal, her folks were close friends of Dorothy Day and they supported the organization financially. While educated as a primary school teacher she was able ultimately to attain a MS in Biology from Boston College. She then went overseas to Nigeria and then Ghana where she taught until 2004. All exemplary right? How about 40 arrests, 2 jail terms. I'm sure the progressives among us would like to group her with the civil rights activists that protested and went to jail. They didn't breach nuclear sites, she did, multiple times.
So do they not get tried on the charges, because they're old, or their social conscience, or that they're hippies and a nun?
How's about none of the above, convicted. Now awaiting sentencing, as well they should be.

5thGenTexan wrote:Another winner from the Department of Injustice and the Obamanation. All these Uber-Conservative fools had better wake up this next election and vote for the least offensive canidate not sit out another one playing with the few marbles they have left. We dang sure don't need to empower a second comming of the Clintons after this band of gangsters. There will be no country left to reclaim, I fear.

They won't do it. They would rather sit around fuming that they didn't get the perfect candidate and all that, and stay home, and let hardcore thuggish liberal-progressive leftwingers run the government, and thus the nation, right into the ground. This argument has run around and around on this site, and you cannot win. And considering how many conservatives (and libertarians, for that matter) that are on this site, it doesn't bode well for the future. All hail Queen Hillary, the nation will bow at her feet, if things hold true-to-form.

Dadtodabone wrote: I agree that their activities highlighted some egregious gaps in security ops at Oak Ridge. And they're old...does that excuse what they did? They did trespass, yes and damage property in excess of $1000 X 2, yes, total damage was $8,500. That's 16 years. From the looks of all of them, still a potential life in prison sentence. Even the 35 years isn't a death sentence CB, no one is executing them, it's life in prison, leave the hyperbole to professionals like MSM journalists.
What about the sabotage charge? Did they have the means to damage equipment and impair production or safety? Tools like hammers and bolt cutters? As you noted, they stated(anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law)they went with the intent to damage, end, erase Y-12 production, the whole beating into plowshares thing. Their intent was sabotage, that they were not able or perhaps were not willing in the end to penetrate Y-12 doesn't change that fact.

I don't excuse them. The deserve some form of punishment.
Sabotage? Sorry, I don't buy it. Legally, their tools may fit enough of a description to make that charge, but I'd consider actual ability under the circumstances. They weren't attempting any more forward progress, which to me indicates no real intent to sabotage.

Again, I've got no issue with charging them with trespass and destruction of property. They should be punished for the crime and responsible for paying for the damage that they did.

Running this up to 16 or 35 years in prison per person? Sure.. They did it. But really? Does that sort of punishment fit the crime?

cb1000rider wrote:

Dadtodabone wrote: I agree that their activities highlighted some egregious gaps in security ops at Oak Ridge. And they're old...does that excuse what they did? They did trespass, yes and damage property in excess of $1000 X 2, yes, total damage was $8,500. That's 16 years. From the looks of all of them, still a potential life in prison sentence. Even the 35 years isn't a death sentence CB, no one is executing them, it's life in prison, leave the hyperbole to professionals like MSM journalists.
What about the sabotage charge? Did they have the means to damage equipment and impair production or safety? Tools like hammers and bolt cutters? As you noted, they stated(anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law)they went with the intent to damage, end, erase Y-12 production, the whole beating into plowshares thing. Their intent was sabotage, that they were not able or perhaps were not willing in the end to penetrate Y-12 doesn't change that fact.

I don't excuse them. The deserve some form of punishment.
Sabotage? Sorry, I don't buy it. Legally, their tools may fit enough of a description to make that charge, but I'd consider actual ability under the circumstances. They weren't attempting any more forward progress, which to me indicates no real intent to sabotage.

Again, I've got no issue with charging them with trespass and destruction of property. They should be punished for the crime and responsible for paying for the damage that they did.

Running this up to 16 or 35 years in prison per person? Sure.. They did it. But really? Does that sort of punishment fit the crime?

Sorry, intent? What if my intent was to relax, have a few drinks after a tough day and then drive home? If I'm stopped and deemed intoxicated does my intent enter into it?

Dadtodabone wrote:

cb1000rider wrote:

Dadtodabone wrote: I agree that their activities highlighted some egregious gaps in security ops at Oak Ridge. And they're old...does that excuse what they did? They did trespass, yes and damage property in excess of $1000 X 2, yes, total damage was $8,500. That's 16 years. From the looks of all of them, still a potential life in prison sentence. Even the 35 years isn't a death sentence CB, no one is executing them, it's life in prison, leave the hyperbole to professionals like MSM journalists.
What about the sabotage charge? Did they have the means to damage equipment and impair production or safety? Tools like hammers and bolt cutters? As you noted, they stated(anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law)they went with the intent to damage, end, erase Y-12 production, the whole beating into plowshares thing. Their intent was sabotage, that they were not able or perhaps were not willing in the end to penetrate Y-12 doesn't change that fact.

I don't excuse them. The deserve some form of punishment.
Sabotage? Sorry, I don't buy it. Legally, their tools may fit enough of a description to make that charge, but I'd consider actual ability under the circumstances. They weren't attempting any more forward progress, which to me indicates no real intent to sabotage.

Again, I've got no issue with charging them with trespass and destruction of property. They should be punished for the crime and responsible for paying for the damage that they did.

Running this up to 16 or 35 years in prison per person? Sure.. They did it. But really? Does that sort of punishment fit the crime?

Sorry, intent? What if my intent was to relax, have a few drinks after a tough day and then drive home? If I'm stopped and deemed intoxicated does my intent enter into it?

You know.....they were not just intending to sabotage an SUV or an irrigation ditch, they were intending to sabotage devices chock full of explosives and largish amounts of plutonium and refined uranium. The potential for an ecological radiation disaster making a large piece of land uninhabitable to mammalian life for 50,000 years was a significant risk.

I have no problem confining an 85 year old radical nun for the rest of her life for that. Being a religious functionary doesn't give you license to violate the law at will, without suffering consequences. Even the thief on the cross had to die that day. And by the way, I live my life according to biblical precepts too and I study the Word. It NEVER does to quote scripture out of context, which is exactly what this group of protesters has done if they are basing their justification on scripture. Breaking into the weapons plant is out of context with the meaning of Isaiah 2:4. If I may quote the whole passage for purposes of debate (using the ESV), it conveys an entirely different message:

1 The word that Isaiah the son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem.

2 It shall come to pass in the latter days
that the mountain of the house of the Lord
shall be established as the highest of the mountains,
and shall be lifted up above the hills;
and all the nations shall flow to it,

3 and many peoples shall come, and say:
“Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord,
to the house of the God of Jacob,
that he may teach us his ways
and that we may walk in his paths.”
For out of Zion shall go the law,
and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.

4 He shall judge between the nations,
and shall decide disputes for many peoples;
and they shall beat their swords into plowshares,
and their spears into pruning hooks;
nation shall not lift up sword against nation,
neither shall they learn war anymore.

5 O house of Jacob,
come, let us walk
in the light of the Lord

Any Biblical scholar will tell you that this passage refers to after the 2nd coming of the Lord. That passage says that, after the Lord returns, HE will judge between the nations, and then those nations will no longer have need for weapons and they will beat them into plowshares and pruning hooks, because people will no longer lift their hands up against their brothers, and there will be no more war. It does NOT say that if first we beat swords into plowshares, then God will come back and there will be no more war. Theologically, this second viewpoint would make no sense, because it directly implies that WE can make GOD do something, and that he is therefore not sovereign. If you are an aging atheist hippie, then you don't even believe in this prophesy, so misquoting the prophet Isaiah is ridiculous on its face. If you are an aging nun who claims to believe in this prophesy, then you are quoting the Bible out of context, and shame on you for trying to use the Word of the Almighty God to deceive people with it, because A) the prophesy has not yet been fulfilled, and B) you cannot force God's hand to make him fulfill it.

Even so, we have a secular government which is constitutionally barred from either establishing particular religious viewpoint, or preventing the free exercise thereof, and the religion of the accused cannot be included in determining whether or not to enforce existing laws (refusals to enforce the law being the Obama administration specialty) unless the law makes a specific and constitutionally unchallenged allowance for religion in its text. I'm pretty sure that the laws protecting America's nuclear arsenals do not contain that exception in the text.

The Annoyed Man wrote: You know.....they were not just intending to sabotage an SUV or an irrigation ditch, they were intending to sabotage devices chock full of explosives and largish amounts of plutonium and refined uranium. The potential for an ecological radiation disaster making a large piece of land uninhabitable to mammalian life for 50,000 years was a significant risk..

Where do you get that information? As I read it, they posted their sign and stopped.. And waited for a very long time before security showed up.
They're smart enough to understand the effects of nuclear radiation. Why are you saying that they were intending to go any farther than they did... I missed it.. and if it's there, I'll agree with running up the charges.