Joined
·
4,499 Posts
My opinion about this particular situation is she should NOT be looking at 20yrs based on what is being reported to us. Would Fla rather she shot and killed her threat?It's about right and wrong.
I agree from what was in the article. The whole truth of the trial may have a different aspect than the article did. It is just wrong a gang banger gets 5-10 year for a drive by shooting, and she gets 20 for shooting a wall.My opinion about this particular situation is she should NOT be looking at 20yrs based on what is being reported to us. Would Fla rather she shot and killed her threat?![]()
ditto......OMG!!!! I'm sick and tired of all these people throwing the "race" card around. It's not about skin color!!! It's about right and wrong.
They had no choice. FL law requires a minimum of 20 years on an aggravated assault where a firearm is used.My opinion about this particular situation is she should NOT be looking at 20yrs based on what is being reported to us. Would Fla rather she shot and killed her threat?![]()
There's no 5-10 for a driveby in FL. It's a 20 year minimum. Now, if the State Attorney lets them plead down to a lesser charge, that's another matter.I agree from what was in the article. The whole truth of the trial may have a different aspect than the article did. It is just wrong a gang banger gets 5-10 year for a drive by shooting, and she gets 20 for shooting a wall.
I hate that the race card had to be played again, and then the quick spin back to the Trevon shooting. Funny how this is depicted on both sides of the gun.