The physical evidence doesn't support the notion that she was shooting it out with cops, but she was holding magazines for the guns used to shoot it out with cops, which makes her party to a violent felony, and guilty of any other felonies that result from that action, like the murder of the trooper and assault of the other. People love the felony murder rule when it gets the "right" people, but not when it gets someone who had been accused of (read: indicted on) half a dozen other violent felonies including ambushing other police officers.

Idk man. A lot of bias at that trial, and there was evidence she was shot from the back with her hands up.

a.Except as provided in N.J.S.2C:11-4, criminal homicide constitutes murder when:

(1)The actor purposely causes death or serious bodily injury resulting in death; or

(2)The actor knowingly causes death or serious bodily injury resulting in death; or

(3)It is committed when the actor, acting either alone or with one or more other persons, is engaged in the commission of, or an attempt to commit, or flight after committing or attempting to commit robbery, sexual assault, arson, burglary, kidnapping, carjacking, criminal escape or terrorism pursuant to section 2 of P.L.2002, c.26 (C.2C:38-2), and in the course of such crime or of immediate flight therefrom, any person causes the death of a person other than one of the participants; except that in any prosecution under this subsection, in which the defendant was not the only participant in the underlying crime, it is an affirmative defense that the defendant:

(a)Did not commit the homicidal act or in any way solicit, request, command, importune, cause or aid the commission thereof; and

(b)Was not armed with a deadly weapon, or any instrument, article or substance readily capable of causing death or serious physical injury and of a sort not ordinarily carried in public places by law-abiding persons; and

(c)Had no reasonable ground to believe that any other participant was armed with such a weapon, instrument, article or substance; and

(d)Had no reasonable ground to believe that any other participant intended to engage in conduct likely to result in death or serious physical injury.

1. Bad things share a whole host of common elements, might as well protest "All Bad Things" then, right? That isn't confusing and potentially disconcerting to allies, right?

2. Do you think under-scrutinized use of deadly force by police is something that only afflicts minorities, or that somehow cops are only punished when they kill whites?

3. So it's about police brutality but it's also about people who aren't police? Who exactly is being protested and why? (Do you see yet why expanding the object of protests gets confusing and impotent pretty quickly?)

What does Nazism have to do with the discussion of groups of people impacted by police use of force?

I don't see it that way. Those folks are just taking a knee or protesting for a different reason. All marches generally look the same but folks are marching for different reasons. No one dismisses a domestic violence march or a cancer march because it looks similar to a march against Mike Glennon. Saying that all athletes must take a knee for the same reason is silly.

I think there is a legit reaction of you wont divide us (Trump trying to shame the protesting players and pit the other players agasint them) but unfortunately that completely swallowed the whole thing and now it's all about locking arms in unity.

Thankfully, because Adam Silver had decreed it, we don't have to worry about that garbage in the NBA.

Where are all my NBA people?

I have to bump this again. Just an amazing job of shutting down speech by Adam Silver. His league is filled with players and coaches who will talk bad about the President, protest at things like the ESPYs, and try and be at the forefront of social commentary and yet this guy was able to basically say "Hey players, you will not do anything to our national anthem!" and they all got in line and said "Thank you sir".

The thing is the NBA actually gives the players the sense that they're partners and takes their actual concerns seriously rather than treating them like products. Look at how Martha Ford has handled the anthem protests for the Lions compared to the rest of the league.

Yet the NBA is the one with the rule that literally makes not standing for it a punishable offense! Well done Adam Silver! Oh, but you make the players feel good!

Yet the NBA is the one with the rule that literally makes not standing for it a punishable offense! Well done Adam Silver! Oh, but you make the players feel good!

Why do you think there is no public outrage that he is stifling their rights?

People love when white people stifle the rights of black people.

Stop speaking in sarcasm so it's easier to figure out what your actual point is

So even though the players don't seem to have any issue with the rule, you do?

The NFL supposedly made a run at him to replace Goodell. Clearly, the NFL appreciates how Adam Silver suppressed the voices of the players of his league as much as I do! Can't blame Silver for turning it down though. Can you imagine the uproar if the NFL passed a rule that fines/suspends players for not standing for the anthem?

What's your game, here, friend? Are you trying to say that Adam Silver isn't actually befitting his "wokest Comissioner" title because his league has a rule mandating players stand for the anthem? Or are you saying that outrage over rules mandating millionaire athletes stand for the anthem are a silly hill to die on, because Silver has shown that a commissioner and league can be regressive in its power wielding (stand for the anthem rule) but incredibly progressive in other others?