So is it fair?

Can there be a fair trial when you see websites like this one that are so convinced of what they “think” is the truth, the truth may be very different, the truth may not be known by even fox news, as good as they “think” that they are, they may be wrong, in fact the US justice system has been wrong in the past.

Can this girl get a fair trial at all?

When you have the media convinced of her guilt, most all of the bobble heads at fox news, and likely other news companies also, have said time and time again by action and by inference, that there are some issues that have not been addressed, do we not have a real working system of justice here?

Earlier we were witness, to a fox news commentator, that made a statement, about how they felt that the defense was trying to show a likely result.

There was no real fair and balanced view presented.

In fact there was only one view presented, that was the “we think that she is guilty view point”

When you look at the thought process, involved here you have to think about one thing and one thing alone, is this fair and is this balanced.

When you hear someone make a statement on national TV about how they think that the defense is trying to show reasonable doubt, and that there is no real reasonable doubt, (allegedly) they fail to make that correct impression, by only presented one point of view, it is not a fair thing to do, what if they are wrong, will they come out and apologize that they made allegedly stupid statements?

For example Phil Keating, talks about about what they “think” the defense is trying to do but he only makes one statement, that statement, is filled with invective, that calls for the conclusion of an alleged, verdict of guilty.

Just now on live TV, the bobble head, made the statement, of what the defense “hopes” to prove, this could be made differently you could say the defense may be trying to show that the use of a particular method of disposing of the body of a pet, might be something to consider in this case.

But they did not say that, they seem to be stuck using words that presume the idea of guilt.

You can use words to influence the thinking of anyone, for example while writing this article, I could use many different points or words to make a point, however, I choose to try to show a counter point, that is not happening on Fox news, the (Fair and balanced news company)

Is this fair and balanced coverage or is it just one sided?

College student shoots home invader, saves 10 lives

Yet another reason to keep a gun in the house . . .

gun control debate, well if you were one of those college students that were about to be murdered do you think you might have a different outlook?

In the first days of May, 2009, in the notoriously dangerous neighborhood of College Park in Atlanta, Georgia, two armed criminals broke into a house party of students.

After confiscating the group’s valuables, the invaders split the men and women up into different rooms.

Witnesses say the perpetrators then counted their rounds and discussed if they had “enough” ammunition.

The students believed the gunmen were going to rape and murder the entire group of students, who were celebrating a birthday at the end of the semester.

However, one male student, whose identity is being protected by police and local media, retrieved a handgun from his backpack and fired at the thug who was detaining the men.

(That is: One smart student had prepared for a night in College Park, Atlanta.)

The criminal fled the apartment under the threat of injury and never returned.

The student continued on into the girls’ room, found the other thug, 23-year-old Calvin Lavant, preparing to rape his first victim.

The student exchanged gunfire with Lavant, lethally wounding him in the process. Lavant fled through a window and died in front of his apartment, only one building away.

One of the female students was injured during the exchange, but doctors expect a full and complete recovery.

So what’s the point?

A student saved the girls from rape, and saved the whole group of 10 people (including himself) from murder . . . and he did it with a handgun.

This is a perfect example of how ludicrous “big city gun laws” are. What if this had happened in New York, Chicago, or any of the other big cities that criminalize their citizens’ self defense?

Yes, we would be reading an entirely different story — one so horrendous that we would shudder at the very words.

Either this whole group of friends would have been raped and murdered by these two sorry excuses for human beings . . . or the hero of this story would be facing prison time for firearm possession and murder.

And that’s exactly how gun-grabber Michael Bloomberg and his Mayors Against Illegal Guns want it.

Thankfully, however, Atlanta hasn’t outlawed self-defense yet. And since someone had a gun and was willing to use it, innocent life was preserved.

Congratulations to the unnamed hero of this story. You saved your friends’ lives.

In Liberty,

Dudley Brown
Executive Director
National Association for Gun Rights