Dont forget the case was held in the Peoples Republic of California so different laws may apply

well, having just served time on a jury not long ago.....they told us to talk over everything-after the case is handed over of course...like they said, we each might miss something, or hear something others didn't. then you have your own knowledge to go on as well. etc etc.
if the guy is guilty as hell, and i believe he is 100%, then they did the right thing by finding him guilty.

I don't want part in any society that teaches kids to shoot guns and hunt. That's my qualm with using "we."

Well, lets see if I can get in trouble here....I have never publically stated whether I believe OJ to be guilty, I have said I think Peterson did kill his wife and baby. I won't give a personal opinion on OJ because he was found "not guilty" by the jury therefore my opinion is worthless and meaningless. Peterson having been convicted I believe frees me to say I question the verdict. It would have been difficult for me to vote "guilty" had I been on the Peterson jury cause I agree that the evidence was convincing but short of conclusive...so I am not comfortable that the jury reached the correct verdict. In the OJ case, my problem is Furman...a racist cop who admitted he'd gladly falsify evidence against a black man handling key evidence in the case...in all honesty, I don't think I would have voted differently from the jury. I think for our system of justice to work...for a jury to "do the right thing", they have to vote based solely on the evidence presented, so...in my opinion..the right thing for the jury is determined by the evidence presented, not the actual guilt or innocense of the accused. When a person's fate is to be determined, what someone "knows" or assumes doesn't matter...

I understand...but while I agree with you, I am part of that "we" also!

i just know what they told us there-that yes, you are supposed to use what was presented-but that you aren't supposed to completely ignore common knowledge, previous experience, etc. by the same token, you aren't supposed to consider things the judge says not to-such as if one lawyer asks a question and that questioning is halted, but the witness answers before objections being raised.

it's the beauty of living here. everyone has rights, and everyone has the choice of whether or not to exercise those rights. but just because i choose to, or not to, i won't criticize anyone else for choosing differently. it'd be nice if everyone felt that way.

I usually agree, but hunting for the sake of hunting is, to me, one of the most despicable "activities" -- if you can call it that -- one can possibly participate in.

It's not as if it's just some alternate interest I don't understand. I don't understand plenty of stuff.. Opera, theater, painting, etc. But I'm not disgusted by any of it.

Hunters are disgusting and morally corrupt.

Yep, count me in here too! I went hunting a couple times in WVa with my first wife's family...never shot anything, never wanted to...just figured I'd go with them and see what the attraction was. Ended up behind trees taking turns shooting at each other...did I mention we took several bottles of Southern Comfort along? Never got the thrill of hunting animals...after I got back from Nam, I realized that what I had been called upon to do for real was what these guys were role playing...not the same though, Charlie shot back, deers don't. As I've said (along with others here), if someone needs to hunt for food, I'm ok with that...but the rest???Why????

well, i was going to get ticked off...but you said hunting for the sake of hunting, and i don't do that...

you can't buy venison in the store.

what i don't understand is:

if i go to the store, and buy meat someone else killed and eat it-that's ok.
but if i kill it, and then eat it, i'm disgusting and morally corrupt? i guess since someone else did the dirty work?

as for your comparison to opera, theatre etc...i was thinking more along the line of activities that some enjoy, while others don't and make moral judgements about. horse racing and gambling for instance. i can't recall anyone saying oh opera, i hate it--those singers are corrupt. but i have heard those arguments, and similar, regarding racing. oh those poor animals, how cruel. or the line a boy said to my daughter the other day when she mentioned barbaro had died. OH. horse racing. we're GOOD CHRISTIANS, we don't believe in gambling. so, he just pretty much summed her up as being a bad person, because she felt bad about barbaro.

dahoss, the deer win far more battles then they don't. trust me on that one.

it's a real shame that there are those that have more empathy for the criminals and or no sympathy for the victims.

if you don't know right and wrong at 17 you're never going to get it

If hunters wanted to be real sporting, hey wouldnt use guns, they would use their bare hands like Rambo. Their is nothing sporting about them. If you cant find another hobby to keep your life enjoyable other than killing animals, you are lame and should seek help. Bang!

my big issue with all this is, if you don't want to hunt fine. but i don't see why anyone has to be so judgemental because they don't understand it.

how many of you like it when someone gets indignant about your enjoyment of racing and betting? does it bother you when you're judged for that? but it's ok for you to do the same to someone else when it's about a subject you don't like i suppose...

and you all are aware that most money for wildlife management, for wildlife areas, comes from hunters, right?
did you know deer #'s are higher than during colonial times?
that members of the nwtf have brought wild turkey #'s to unprecedented levels. and no, hunters didn't almost run them to extinction-loss of habitat did. and guess who stepped up...yep, rotten hunters. the lot of them should be horse whipped.

Good question Danzig and believe me, I have lost certain "friends" along the way because of my devotion to horse racing & the gambling of it. I know many people think I am a bit of an oddball (aka loser) because I am not more interested in normal things like going to bars and playing in basketball leagues. To be honest I could care less about that, as long as I have respect from my wife and the few friends that count. Everyone else can say what they want.

I guess its because of the stereotype of horse player that one ses in OTBs. The bad rap hunting gets can also be attributed to the negative stereotype you see from hillbillies driving pick up trucks looking like they havent bathed in a longer time than the deer they are hunting and their badass attitude.

You arent erasing either one of these so if it means something to you go ahead and do it and dont listen to what others have to say. You only go around once baby.

hunting is spiritual

and it is possible for Fruman to be a racist cop and for OJ to be guilty
regardless of the verdict