http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/14/trayvon-martin-shooting-target_n_3079566.html We just gotta do this one here. The Trayvon Martin picture was not meant for shooting at because it was only a training aid. It doesn't get any better with the racists than this!
That's what I expected. It really has become that bad hasn't it. This has so much to do with Obama becoming president. Who could have known the US was so backward?
Framed? Did this good police officer who doesn't hate blacks just bring the Trayvon Martin targets to the range so his fellow officers could see what "NOT" to shoot at. And when he offered them to his fellow officers to shoot at was he misunderstood by his fellow officers. Is the world out to frame all people who like to shoot at targets safely so they will never confuse a bad guy with a good guy? Framed? You people who love your guns decide. You owe it to us to make sure your reputation is not soiled by Ron King's fellow officers who are the real racists. Yup!
Kinda hard to imply it was a no-shoot target when it has a big old bullseye right in the center of the target.
Yeah but lots of things have bullseyes on them and they aren't for shooting at. Sarah Palin posted a bunch of pictures of states with senators' names on them with crosshairs on them that she said weren't for shooting. If you took cheap dinner plates to a range would they be for shooting or for having a hot dog on them? Do you just want to take away all the guns?
Any of them happen to be controversial person like TM or GZ? Sarah Palin is hardly an example of rational thinking. Again, do any of those dinner plates have the image of a controversial person like TM, or GZ? This conversation has nothing to remotely do with Gun Control. So I'll just refuse to answer this one.
Yeah it does have something to do with gun control. The Florida government wants to take away a person's right to defend themselves against blacks with hoodies. And the defence being discussed is guns of course. They want to control the use of guns on black people. So Ron King just wanted to show his fellow officers who told on him that his targets weren't to shoot at but to show what's not to shoot at. And so just because he brings a training aid that looks a lot like Trayvon to a range you think he should be fired? You think he's prejudiced against a black kid with a hoody who's carrying a package of skittles? I think you just want to stop good people from killing kids with hoodies on that look black! Everybody needs to watch the video again because it can't get any better than that!
This current conversation has nothing to do with gun control, but the actions of a Law Enforcement Officer making a stupid decision in his life that got him fired. Yeah, our congressmen are sitting with our governor constructing ways for black people to be able to attack whoever they like. I am starting to think you are insane. You don't need a gun to defend yourself unless you are being attacked with a gun. However, this isn't about gun control. For the sake of repeating myself, this is about a police officer using the image of TM for target practice. <<< Mod Edit: Insult >>> Here I was thinking they wanted to curb gun violence for everyone, not just against a certain sect of people. He did this by plastering a picture of TM with a bullseye on it? I think he should be fired because he failed to practice good judgement on what is ethical and what is not ethical. A filter which is critical when you are enforcing the law. Like I stated in other threads, if this was a Tax Accountant, or a store manager I wouldn't have an opinion on the matter. Unfortunately we are talking about a Police Officer who failed to practice good judgement. I think he is a moron who thought it would be a gag to portray the Police are willing to shoot at unarmed targets. Good people don't kill innocent people, however in a perfect world, Police would be able to have 100% perfect judgement and never shoot an innocent person. Race, or social standing should have no impact on a decision making of a Police Officer.
So now you think that they should fire a police officer who brought a training aid to a range for a joke. Even though the training aid was definitely not to shoot at. No wonder America is being taken over by the communists under Obama. Next you'll be saying that people don't have a right to stand their ground and shoot at blacks. Pretty soon all blacks will be protected and nobody will be able to shoot at them. That's what Hussein Obama wants isn't it? Obama doesn't even want police officers to bring pictures of their wives and children in their wallets to shooting ranges. Isn't it obvious?
Yes, it doesn't matter what the intentions were, he failed to practice good judgement and got fired for it. How hard is that for you to process? Well that explains the bullseye that is firmly centered on the target then? Unrelated, but companies have been looking at record high profits. If Obama was a communist, he's doing a (*)(*)(*)(*)ty job at it. What I am saying is no one should have a right to shoot unarmed people under the guise of "Stand Your Ground" the law is so broad and vague it is a target to misinterpretation. Which is what the GZ vs TM case is centered around. The only one implying any racial energy into this discussion is yourself, and you are doing a foolish job of doing it. <<< Mod Edit: Insult >>> I assure you, if a Police Officer was using a picture of their spouse or their children as target practice, he wouldn't be able to leave the range with his badge and gun.
I didn't say that police officers would take pictures of their wives or their children to ranges to shoot at. I said they take them in their wallets and Hussein Obama wants to fire them for that. Why are you trying to protect Obama? This police officer took the trayvon picture to the range becaue he liked Trayvon and he wanted to show his fellow officers a picture of a black kid that they shouldn't shoot at ever! I think 'you're' the crazy one!
Then show me a single bill or law being put in place that forbids Officers that they can not put pictures of their family in their wallets? No one has been fired for family pictures. Quit making up this imaginary Obama to drive your point. It makes you look like a madman. I'm not trying to protect Obama, I'm simply confused on why you insist on bringing him into the conversation when he has nothing to do with the conversation at hand. Yeah this settles it. <<< Mod Edit: Personal Attack-not necessary >>>
A single bill to prove it is the second amendment that says it's o.k. to take pictures of your family anywhere you want and that includes the range, as long as you don't shoot at them. What's wrong with that? What's wrong with Hussein Obama that he want to stop that? Tell me that if you're so smart! And he wants to take away all guns and the second amendment too. Who's insane now!!!
