moosetracker

perdidochas - "The evidence points towards my view of the story, or more on a legal standpoint, there is no evidence that Zimmerman started the physical confrontation. WIth our legal system, we have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that someone did something. Defendants are not required to prove that they didn't do something. " Perhaps in the media you watch it may seem to you there was more evidence for Zimmermon.. The media took sides and favored only showing what pointed out their theory.. But, no you side held no better evidence.. All you had was Zimmermans word, which he did not want to get on the stand and restate under oath, so he just let videos play out, and those videos held a lot of lies that were proved false.. So it left questions as to if anything was the truth.. You couldn't get the other side of the story as Martin lay dead.. All other accounts were guesswork, or seeing a part of the fight from a distance in the dark, or listening in on the fight.. No one SAW who started it.. Yes there is reasonable doubt as to who started it first.. But, evidence does not point towards your view, no more then to the other view.. It is just that with reasonable doubt as to who is telling the truth, the outcome by rules of the court favored the side you were rooting for. Having reasonable doubt does not mean he had more or better evidence to convince anyone of anything that he said. Why is it Zimmermans right to stop a total stranger and ask them what they are doing?.. He wasn't the police, he didn't even identify himself as neighborhood watch. He just stalked someone for a while make him feel nervous, then without giving any reason demanded Martin to explain himself.. And his neighborhood may have been burglarized, but there is no proof it was by young black men except for in Zimmermans mind, as evidenced by the fact that he only called the police if it was a black man (or men) walking in his neighborhood..

Martin didn't get shot from walking around. He got shot from trying to beat somebody. If Martin had done what we tell every kindergarden kid to do--keep your hands to yourself, he would be alive, and Zimmerman would have a normal life. Or Martin was shot even though he tried to defend himself from a man with a gun.. You don't know that Martin started it perdidochas..Unfortunatly no one knows. Do you tell your kindergaden kids to keep their hands to themselves if some strange man tries to haul them into their car and kidnap them, or do you tell them to yell scream and fight for their lives. Keep your hands to yourself is only taught when the kid is poking at the other kid who is trying to ignore the instigator or when two kids are poking at each other.. And it is said to BOTH kids not just the black kid (or at least it should be said to both kids.).. It might be said a little more severly to the known instigator and that in this case would have been Zimmermon who should not have been stalking Martin.

Don't quite get you jblake, in a court case the jury must all come to a consensus, it is not a vote, and the majority wins. Therefore all must agree to the verdict. One person holding a different opinion means the jury stays out until that jury member either changes their opinion, or he changes the opinion of all the other jury members, or the decide it is a hung jury... That all jury members decided not guilty due to having doubts to his guilt is not a strange outcome at all. Also I wasn't implying there was such a thing as a verdict of innocent, not guilty or guilty.. Just that the whole trial both for and against Zimmerman was on speculation because there was no one who saw the whole thing who had a good view.. Partial viewings, bad lighting, interpretation of voices, someone hearing things over a phone but not seeing anything, and the phone cutting out..A physical fight no one knows who started, cries for help no one can say which one was crying for help. Then a lot of speculation one way or the other.. I don’t see how any of the jury could have come to a concrete decision one way or the other on guilt or innocence. Just if there is doubt, then they have to side for the defense. Some guilty verdicts may have a level of doubt, but they have a lot of hard evidence to wash away the doubt. There really was no hard evidence on either side hear.. Some guilty verdicts the jury can be sure about their decision.. The Boston bomber is pleading innocent.. Not sure what his defense will be.. Insanity?? He feels he doesn’t have to abide by US Laws?? It wasn’t him in those videos, throwing bombs at the police, hijacking cars.. He just happened to get shot and fall into a boat wounded that had all this writing all over it as to why the Boston bombing took place.

I agree with you on that account.. The question that was put in the jury's mind though was what did Martin do after he knew he was being followed, run to the safety of his home? No, this is confirmed.. Confront the guy and pick a fight with him and pummel him????????????? React in self defense and only fight back when he himself thought he had no other choice??????????????? When there is reasonable doubt then black or white, the ruling is for the defense.. The defense worked in enough reasonable doubt, as to what happened.. Was it Trayvon screaming for help or Zimmermon.. Myself, I think it was Trayvon, due to the screaming stopping when the gun was fired.. If Zimmermon was screaming for help, then even after shooting as far as I am concerned he would have continued to scream, "Help I need police", "Help, I need an ambulance", "Help, I need something".. At least one or two shots.. But, that is my opinion, with no proof, and others will equally argue that they think it was Zimmerman.. So who is right? Reasonable doubt for the Jury.. I do hope they sue the guy, I think that is something they will win. He is not 100% innocent.. I doubt the jury let him off feeling he was 100% innocent, they just agreed there was too much reasonable doubt. He was found not guilty, he was not found innocent.

rdclements - All that is true.. But there was enough doubt as to whether it was just pure stupidity on Zimmerman's part or some form of intent.. IHere are two scenerios.. Two kids decide to jump of rocks into the water, and one hits rocks and dies, is the other kid at fault?. The surviving kid was the one who came up with the idea and talked the other one into it. In the end though both kids made a bad decision and one now is dead. A mother leaves her baby in the car on a hot day and goes into a building on an errand.. The baby overheats and dies.. Are both of these people guilty of manslaughter? I would say the child would not be convicted and the mother would be. The question brought into this case was how much did Trayvon decide to do that may have aided in his death.. I don't believe Zimmerman when he says the kid jumped out of a bush and attacked him. But, even the friend who was on the phone with Trayvon showed he might have been the one to start conversation.. He was talking to her on the phone, then broke conversation with her and she heard him ask Zimmermon "Hey, why are you following me?" Question is did Zimmermon do anything that instigated the conversation that was physical or that was vocal that the friend did not hear through the phone. Zimmermon was in some sort of fight.. Started by Zimmermon or Trayvon??? Doesn't matter, defense used both to create reasonable doubt, that Trayvon may have made some poor decisions also that had he not, he may have lived. I agree, Zimmermon got off to lightly, but it is not hard to create reasonable doubt.

JoeBob- you took that comment out of context.. I did not call you out as a racist, simply the comment you made as being a racist comment.. Where that idea came from could have been shaped by media with a racist point of view, or by friends you talked to with one, or it could have been formed in your own. To state you are racist I would have to line up a bunch of comments by you on this board that show you are always making racist statements that showed a pattern. But, not seeing the obvious in your statement when pointed out to you, but instead going on the defensive isn’t a very good sign.. Personally I think the public is being too harsh on Paula Dean.. So she made some racist comments.. I think some of her sorrow is fake also.. But, hey she is from the south, she is an older lady.. Would she have made racist comments in her lifetime?.. She would be lying to say she didn’t. As for the whole wedding theme thing, I can see her romanticizing how things were from her memories, without looking at that time period from the blacks perspective when making the comment.. For her times were good, and the comment was made as the idea popped into her head, not after long thought and deliberation.. I always remember my mother’s statement to me when I was shocked as a teen hearing a racial statement from her for the first time I could remember. “Yes, I do have racial thoughts. I grew up in a time period when that was the norm.. I have to work at it, be conscious of it, and try to curve it. I do that so that you and your sisters do not grow up with the same prejudices.. I never thought of my mother as a racists even after she uttered that comment, made that statement, and had a panic attack over my sister marrying a black man, which she then talked herself down from the ceiling and my sister’s husband never knew of her first reaction but always saw her as open and accepting.. Why did I never see her as a racist? Because she was aware of her tendencies and worked hard to change them.. I see Paula Dean as someone who had to struggle with the prejudices she was taught in her formative years, but if she worked to control her demons then you have to forgive her for a few slip-ups.

I agree with Basementdweller, I don't think only white people were for one side and black people for another.. Nor was it totally a black/white issue.. SOME of it was a black/white issue.. SOME of it though breaks on people who support stricter gun controls and those who do not, and SOME broke on other issues such as if you could see your son in similar danger based on his age, your neighborhood, your neighbors.. Anyway there were different reasons that people took different sides and it was not a straight black/white split. So yes Joe Bob your seeing only black & white was very narrow minded and racist.. I also agree that listening to the trial, I sort of guessed this outcome.. There was enough reasonable doubt.. I knew murder was out the door, they did not have enough proof for that and a lot of doubt was introduced.. Manslaughter was better, but still a little weak.. That the jury asked for some clarification on manslaughter it showed that is what they debated also.. I also agree with Basement that like OJ Simpson, Zimmermon will loose a civil trial.. But, I don't know about his life being over.. He has a lot of people against him, but he also has a lot of people supporting him.. He can forget a career in law enforcement, that's for sure.. But, someone will offer him a job and in certain circles he will be treated as a hero.. Will someone shoot him?? Perhaps, that could be how his life might be over.. Still, I would say if he can survive 5 to 10 years, his survival rate will go up as emotion runs hot for a while, then just dies to a simmering stew.

JoeBob : "I wonder why a non believer would want to join an organization of believers (in this case the Boy Scouts). I do not get it. " From what I see of members of the BSA I would hardly call us a group of "believers" like a church would be.. Perhaps some units tightly controlled by a religious organization who limit their units to members of their church, or insist on prayer and Sunday services.. But, the majority of groups that treat religious teachings as up to the parents and really don't deal with it, we are a group of believers and those who don't give it much thought except a fuzzy perhaps there is something.. Since BSA units are not 90% to 100% of prayer and Bible readings, but instead 90% to 99% of camping and fun, I get it.. Joe - If your unit it 90% to 100% religion centered, I feel sorry for the fun your kids are missing.

I like some of your cuisine but must admit I can take the real spicy stuff.. If I can't taste the food and all I can do is sweat and drink water, no thank you.. Funny about your insight into why the South like to keep their poor and ignorant, poor and ignorant.. I was going to throw out a remark close to what you have stated, but I think I would have had the Southern backlash for it.. It is best it came from a fellow Southerner... I will just state that I agree with your assessment..

We got chowda very tasty too... And our lobster & syrup is good too, so don't knock it until you've tried it.. Now let's discuss your hominy & grits... Yuuck.. You can keep it. Although packsaddle I think your statement is done tongue in cheek, I will have to say, I am glad you are proud of your states desires to act like a third world nation, because it seems your government is striving for that effect. The hole is not big enough let's dig a little deeper.. We don't have enough poor, let's make more poor or make the poor poorer.. We have a poor education system, what can we do to make it worse?.. We have high teenage pregnancy... How can we make it higher?? All I'm saying is if not only a poor health education in schools is the cause of your high teen pregnancy, but also having a subpar education system in general and more poverty.. Well that is not an excuse for why you should be let off the hook for a higher teenage pregnancy rate.. All 3 of those things plus others may contribute.. But, you have not named anything that is out of your control.. In fact it is caused by your government.. So, if your proud of it great, but also be proud of all the teenage mothers your states actions produce.

Ok 99.9% of teenagers will not follow some uptight prissy conservative view, be it their parents or teachers.. 99.9% will learn in the locker rooms that which is not discussed in home & school but it will have added to it some childhood imaginations, and being passed around through rumors & innuendos will not be given out correctly.. I guess somehow you were hatched as an adult and never went though any teen years so are not aware that teens do not listen to adults.. So you got through to .01% of your teenage kids.. Celebrate.. What is going to happen to the other 99.9% of them who are ill prepared??? Do these states have a worse education system and more poverty.. I would imagine they do.. They are Republican states, so those state governments should work on those problems also. I would hang my hat on these statics over Rick Perry forcing Abstinence only education in Texas because "it worked for him"... Maybe the fact that he is a male unable to become pregnant had something to do with it.. and "yes" not having sex works, it is just it is unrealistic to believe the kids will do that, and when they don't they are unprepared to protect themselves from it.. Our schools do not teach sex and promiscuity and here is your condoms and birth control pills.. They teach a balance of it all, respect for yourself, respect for your body, making sure you are mentally ready, withstanding peer pressure.. These lessons do not have to be rolled up in religious scripture to be taught.. But then we respect our teens enough to know that at some point they will take that big step, and here is what you need to know when you do.. The Republican "Big Government" rules and regulations are just being voted in.. We will know in a few years when the Northern states teen pregnancy keep going down and the states with these new regulations start to rise up..

LOL KDD.. Early morning and I was reading slowly.. I got to the "No Marriage" Policy and had time to think about it before finishing the statement.. I thought you meant leaders could not be married.. So if a couple wanted to be scout leaders they needed to divorce before they could do that.. Or perhaps it's a total "No Marriage" policy where you just allow single adult leaders only.. I guess I would call that rule a strict "no co-ed tenting" policy rather then a "No Marriage" policy.

Brewmeister - you make no sense, the "no dating" policy is not about adult with adult adult leadership in the venturing crew, many of the crews adult leadership is with husband & wife both being leaders, there are some stories of blossoming romances through being adult leaders in scouting also, I know a few couples myself who met in scouting .. It applies to only the crew members.. Could two adult leaders of same sex fine their sole mates through scouting someday in the future, once the ban is lifted?? A definite possibility.. Good for them..

The carving out of the law into lessor crimes with the Romeo & Juliet laws to me still says society is accepting of teenage sex, (more like prefer you didn't, but I have to live in reality and accept that most likely you will.) While Teens having sex (consensual or not) with people who have a large age gap is still being considered not as teenage sex, but more of older adults finding easy prey out of gullible teenage kids.. The adults should be old enough to know better, and the teens can still do stupid things.. Therefore the adults are expected to protect the children from themselves if need be.. (Say a young girl who throws herself at her teacher..) To me this isn't teen sex at all, as one of the sexual partners is not a teen.. I just looked up NH law, seems we have a rule that it is a misdemeanor if the age gap is no more the 4 years.. If you think about it, that is a very large range in years.. Since age of consent is 16 that means a 16yo would have to go after a 13yo to be labeled a pedophile..And you would need to be 19years old trying to date a 15yo to be a pedophile We use to have it as a 3 year gap in age, and moved it to a 4 year gap in age.. At those ages the gaps in years is very noticeable to young adults that they should feel that there is something wrong with a relationship with this age gap.. If a state hasn't carved out a Romeo/Juliet law perhaps you could say it is to be used to scare teens away from teenage sex.. But, since more states are carving out these rules while making the penalties for true pedophiles stricter.. I guess I just don't see it as society trying to use the rules to scare teenagers away from sex amongst themselves.

Actually I brought up Sandusky, not Packsaddle.. So you are talking about Romeo & Juliet laws, which some states have and some do not.. Mostly because pedophiles laws are getting stronger and being enforced and even out of prison you are labeled for life with where you can live, and having to register publically to which then you get neighbors complaining about you moving into the neighborhood.. This is tough punishment for a boy that is only 6 months to a year older then his girlfriend and does not think about the consequence of that year/6 months when he becomes of age and she is still underage.. Before the victims never came forward, the parents did not want to prosecute, it was the father doing the abuse and was considered a "family matter" no one got involved in, or no one believed the child.. The Romeo & Juliet laws are trying to help young kids from being ruined for life for things that in the past no one would have prosecuted him for. Our own high school had one of these incidents, my son knew the two kids involved. The girls dad wanted to ruin the life of the boy who was 6 months older then the girl. and had been dating her for like 3 or 4 years. We did not have a Romeo & Juliet ruling, but the New Hampshire courts definitely did not want to throw the book at the boy.. I know there was a lot of counseling and mediating and finally something was settled out of court.. After that I know the law makers started looking into some governance around this, I don't know if anything was passed on it.. Still I will maintain these exception clauses are springing up due to the fact that we as a society are coming up with very strict and harsh punishments for true pedophiles, where as in the past we ignored the crime, and while some deserve the book thrown at them, some do not.. It is not all that different from punishments doled out to a person who stole a loaf of bread and someone who broke into an electronics store and ran off with $10,000 worth of merchandise, which focus on the amount stolen to decide whether it is petty theft or Grand Theft.

I agree with packsaddle. I know that teenagers having babies out of wedlock in the last 50 years has changed from shuffling them off to a place far from home and putting the baby up for adoption so the girl can return and pretend nothing happened over the past six months of their absence, to making accommodations so the girls can stay in high school up until her due date. I have also heard that some schools who have a large population of unwed mothers have even setup a daycare for the children on the school grounds. Condoms and morning After pills can be obtained in the school also.. Now I know some republican governments are going back to only teaching abstinence in the high school health ed classes.. Which mean there high schools will need those daycares, especially as they make abortions harder to get.. So if he wanted to argue republican politics have gotten more conservative on the topic of sex, I would buy that. Also I would say the reaction this past year by society on the whole Sandusky and Penn State scandal, I would also say society was not accepting pedophiles as fine.. Now colleges corruptive practices of anything goes if it revolves around those in the football program, had a light shown on it in a negative way.. But, they were getting pretty complacent about this as well as heterosexual males who raped women.. So they were pretty even handed over issues of sex on all fronts, as well as theft, vandalism etc..

Well then it is multiple courses with only one course director each year.. Soon there may be two courses, and I was pleased that they are now telling the current course which refuses to go to the new syllabus it won't be recognized as an official NYLT.. The second one coming on will be the new syllabus, in fact I would guess those changes would have been this year, seeing I haven't been to the Council training meetings in about a year since I handed the reigns of Distrinct Training Chair over to my son. That was what was discussed at the last meeting I went to.. So hopefully this year it was a smaller course, and unsure if it was the official or unofficial NYLT course..

Sorry I don't buy the "I am persecuted, because I can't interfere and force my religious beliefs into the lives of others that I don't even personally know, and I am not free to persecute whom I deem worthy of my persecution". That argument just doesn't fly..

Really.. I haven't been there for about 2 years, when we held a training there.. Only went to it maybe 3 times for training courses, my son went to camp there only once about 12 years back and didn't care for it, so stayed with the valley or other scout camps out of district.

Main Lodge??? Hidden valley has a main lodge, cafeteria etc.. Camp Bell.. Not unless they built it in the last year.. The Rock climbing wall can host a decent size group, I forgot they do have a barn, they have horse back riding, other small buildings are really only comfortable for 3 to 6 people. Thanks for the video RS, I had a newspaper article I was going to post this morning, but the site was down this morning for me. Don't recognize anyone in the video... But, the tree looks very familure... (just kidding)..

Thanks for worrying about me, but no I have left the teen years (sounds like even the counselors were youth which is natural for an NYLT, very few adults... BLW2 - " the scouts were taking shelter underneath a canopy when lightening either hit the canopy".. 8:30 might have been a little early for bed.. But 23 boys sounds too large for a patrol grouping.. Still, this course takes in way more boys then they should, like they run the course for 100 boys.. They really should break it into 2 or 3 groups but I don't think the camp can give them 2 or 3 weeks out of the summer... I don't know if they run lots & lots of patrols.. or do big big patrols.. So it could have be a patrol group doing something. There are two camps on the property, one is large and lots of buildings, but Bell is the small one, with I think only 3 buildings the administration building, a boat house and strangely a indoor rock wall.. Why the largest building is an indoor rock wall when everything else is outdoors I don't know.. (Oh yeah and about 6 small staff cabins.)

Not a great way to start off the season at summer camp.. Glad no one was seriously hurt, so hopefully all we will get out of it is some scouts with war stories to tell for years to come..

My units, hardly ever. I have always been part of units that are not of one denomination.. So maybe to let scouts know of a nondenominational service that they are invited to but not required to attend.. When someone needs to do a prayer before a meal for sign-off (if no sign-offs needed prayers are not done).. None of that is long religious discussions of course. I am sure there have been the conversations among youth if the conversation for some reason leads there.. Mainly though it is seen as the parents job to do that part..

The fact that they pulled Kuska's membership over this is troubling.. It screams that they were not ignorant of their mis-doings, but were upset that they were brought to task for it. I agree with packsaddle, don't preach to us about LNT when you will blatently do as you please and punish those who care about the environment enough to be activists on it's behalf.

Makes someone embarrassed to state they are a Christian, how people like that can get up and face a mirror is beyond me.