[twinklesweep]

I'm sorry I was less than clear in my earlier post. When I described the perps as "children," I meant strictly age-wise in that they have not reached adult age; fortunately they are being tried as adults.

And when the poster said they would simply go out and buy another gun, to me that sounded like they could simply go out and buy another gun; nothing was mentioned about legality.

Originally Posted by Golfingnut

One of the men was half African American, one was African American and one was white. MSNBC claims this was a violent crime. FOX claims it was a racially motivated crime.

If this is accurate, then MSNBC was correct and FOX was wrong. You can prove the black kid tweeting from now till the cows come home about hating and wanting to kill whites, and there may be no doubt that these are his true feelings, but I don't believe that had anything to do with this savage murder. The victim was in the wrong place at the wrong time; he could have been of any race and the timing was opportune.

Originally Posted by graciegirl

I don't care if they were bright green. These kids are evil.

Without a doubt they are evil--but that still doesn't make this a "hate crime" in the sense of racism. Remember, these sociopathic perpetrators were "bored" and "decided to kill somebody"; there was no mention that the "somebody" had to be white but rather just had to be opportunistic.

Originally Posted by Golfingnut

I don't know either. I am trying to point out that as normal, FOX jumps out first with statements to make white people lock their doors in fear. One of the three was WHITE. If you condemn every person that has made a racist statement you will have very few of any race innocent. When I watched FOX report on this, they made it sound like a racist assassination. MSNBC reported it as a senseless violent crime and that is what I find correct.

When a media source immediately makes a terrible event like this racial when it was actually violent, it's not only incredibly counterproductive but it also creates divisiveness, with one result being the fear it inspires. But as "they" say (and I agree): it "sells papers"....

Originally Posted by Golfingnut

Good point. My opinion, many children would be better off in an orphanage than being in the possession of their birth mothers.

This is true, but it's worth remembering, before we begin wailing that the world is going to h*** in a handbasket, that this is nothing new!

There has been virtually no reference in this lengthy thread to the reaction in Australia. This is part of the story at the link that follows:

Call for U.S. tourism boycott

The case has triggered fury among many people in Australia.

"It is another example of murder mayhem on Main Street," former Australian Deputy Prime Minister Tim Fischer told CNN's Piers Morgan.

A chart in the Washington Post, using data from The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, shows Australia to have among the lowest gun-related killings in the developed world. The United States had the highest. Former Prime Minister John Howard told CNN's Christiane Amanpour in March that gun control laws instituted after a mass shooting were responsible for the low number.

(Suspect in Australian baseball player's death posed with guns - CNN.com)

I cannot even begin to address the chauvinistic attitude I've already heard expressed along the lines of (and I'm being polite...) "Who's Australia anyway, and who are they to dictate about our tourism industry?" What I do know is that (1) boycotts can be effective, in fact, very effective; and even though our economy has gratefully improved recently, (2) who will be the losers to whatever extent such a boycott happens. On some levels that do count, this murder is, among other things, an "international incident."