MMM organizer guilty in shooting!

[Dennis Olson]

http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A15185-2001Feb1.html

Graham Convicted in Revenge Shooting
Associated Press
Thursday, February 1, 2001; 6:15 PM

(AP) — A 48-year-old mother has been convicted of shooting a man she mistakenly thought murdered her son.

The jury found Barbara Graham guilty on various charges, including aggravated assault with intent to kill.

Graham’s 19-year-old son was shot to death last January. Prosecutors say two days after her son’s funeral, the former D.C. housing official used her son’s gun to avenge his murder. (Me: What is a 19-yo teen doing with a GUN, and in the home of a MMM organizer?)

23-year-old Kikko Smith was paralyzed from the waist down. Police say he had nothing to do with the murder of Graham’s son.

Graham is to be sentenced in March. She faces anywhere from five years to life in prison. The jury didn’t reach a verdict in a co-defendent’s case. The judge told the jury to return tomorrow to continue deliberations on charges against him.

(Comments Curious, eh? NO MENTION of her affiliation with the gun-grabbers. Here's the rest of the story, buried in an earlier Post article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37911-2001Jan23.html

...Graham's case has been rife with incongruities.

In the months after her son's death, Graham became active in Mothers on the Move Spiritually, a Prince George's County group that helped organize the Million Mom March last year against gun violence. Graham spoke out at the march and helped memorialize the dead.

Two months later, she was arrested in the shooting of Smith. Upon her arrest, police seized two guns from her nightstand and two more from elsewhere in her house. This is another sickening example of the liberal effetes' hypocrisy.

Imagine if it had been an NRA official who was on trial!

 

[mikemck]

Imagine that's it's a mother who lost her 19 year old son, and try to resist the urge to turn it into some political grandstanding.
How can we expect gun control advocates not to do the very thing we ourselves engage in every chance we get?

 

[Dennis Olson]

Well, WE are the ones whose rights are under attack, not they.

And gun ownership resuires a level of responsibility and maturity FAR beyond the capacity of flaming liberals, soccer moms, and other human waste.

How many times have we heard the anti-gun bigots say, "You know, I'm SO GLAD that I don't have a gun. What would happen if someone were to hit my car?" or other such drivel.

It is SO TRUE that anti-gun nuts should NOT have guns. No way, no how. They've PROVEN what kind of people they are. And they just CONTINUE to do so.

BTW, you are very new to this board. You will NEVER find ANYONE here that would condone vigilantism. Period. Self-defense is a FAR different issue than vigilantism. If you don't know the difference, perhaps you're on the wrong board...

 

[mikemck]

Well, WE are the ones whose rights are under attack, not they.

What does this kind of finger pointing do to protect your rights?

And gun ownership resuires a level of responsibility and maturity FAR beyond the capacity of flaming liberals, soccer moms, and other human waste.

Qualities that you yourself seem to be obviously lacking.
Your not alone though, as I personally know 4 "gun owners" who lack the same qualities.
Just look & listen for awhile next time your in your favorite gun store, or at your locate range.

How many times have we heard the anti-gun bigots say, "You know, I'm SO GLAD that I don't have a gun. What would happen if someone were to hit my car?" or other such drivel.

I don't know what kind of point you are trying to make here, but I say "bravo" to anyone honest enough to admit that there are times they should not have ready access to a gun.
Again, I can think of several instances where "gun owners" could have benefited from the same kind of self realization.

It is SO TRUE that anti-gun nuts should NOT have guns. No way, no how. They've PROVEN what kind of people they are. And they just CONTINUE to do so.

And all gun owners are just the right kind of people to have guns? Next time your at your local indoor range, just take a look at all the holes in the floors & ceiling.
Attempting to stereotype gun control advocates is just as bad as trying to say all gun owners are just a bunch of uneducated redneck hicks.
As always, it only takes a few to misrepresent the many, especially if that's what you want to see.

BTW, you are very new to this board. You will NEVER find ANYONE here that would condone vigilantism. Period. Self-defense is a FAR different issue than vigilantism. If you don't know the difference, perhaps you're on the wrong board...

First, I'm not new to this board. I just don't feel the need to reply to every thread I read. However, I don't need to be a "veteran" here to know nonsense when I see it.

If you really insist, I know I can find at least one person on this board who does condone it.
This continually crops up, and it's indicative of the elitist mentality that is so prevalent. "Veteran" status, along with about .75 will get you a cup of coffee, which is all it's worth. I would even go so far as to say that maybe you should spend a bit less time here and a bit more time in some kind of therapy.....

 

[Dennis Olson]

Showing your true anti-gun colors at last eh? I think you'd find a MUCH more receptive audience over at the Ms. boards, or on any one of HUNDREDS of liberal boards as well.

"Veteran status" has one truth associated with it: in general we know the people on this board, and how they will react to a given situation. You are NOT in that category. I challenge you to find a SINGLE verteran poster (over 500 posts) who would condone vigilantism.

Now, speaking of therapy, don't you have a post-Klinton grief-therapy meeting to attend somewhere...?

 

[mikemck]

Showing your true anti-gun colors at last eh? I think you'd find a MUCH more receptive audience over at the Ms. boards, or on any one of HUNDREDS of liberal boards as well.

Anti-gun colors? Because I don't agree that anyone who has a gun should have one? Because I would applaud someone for admitting they shouldn't have a gun?
Tell me specifically how you came to the conclusion that I am anti-gun.

"Veteran status" has one truth associated with it: in general we know the people on this board, and how
they will react to a given situation. You are NOT in that category. I challenge you to find a SINGLE verteran poster (over 500 posts) who would condone vigilantism.

What you know is what they tell you. No more, no less.
Unless you know these people in the real world, you have no idea how they would react. I think you are confusing the real world with an on-line virtual community.

So now it's anyone with more than 500 posts?
Do I get a prize if I can find one? The point is not vigilantism. You have good and bad, rash and sensible, calm and hot headed people in EVERY group, wherever you go. It's as simple as that. To say that gun owners are more ethical, sensible, mature, reasonable, law abiding, or anything else is ridiculous. Gun owners are people, plain and simple. To try and paint anyone who does not agree with you as being stupid, or immature, etc. is also just plain silly, and quite immature.

Now, speaking of therapy, don't you have a post-Klinton grief-therapy meeting to attend somewhere...?

I fully admit I started with the insults, but true to form it just escalates. A sign of maturity is resisting the urge to gratify yourself by responding in kind.
I will consider myself to have been put in my place and leave it at that.

 

[DC]

Back to your corners guys. Take it to e-mail

 

[nralife]

mikemck says...

"How can we expect gun control advocates not to do the very thing we ourselves engage in every chance we get?

Who is we... do you have a mouse in your pocket? You certainly don't even speak for the tiniest minority of gun owners. No gun owner that I know of tries to engage in any kind of illegal behavior involving firearms, and they are certainly not dreaming about revenge killings like you insinuate. In reality, it's quite the opposite! The great majority of gun owners value their 2nd Amendment rights so much that they would never take a chance on losing them by committing a crime. I think that you must have this board confused with the "Gangsta Rappin, Puffy Combs Board." LOL

Dennis is right, liberals don't want people owning guns because they fear that everyone else is as unstable as they are. If you don't want to own a gun, fine, but don't try to take mine away from me because you can't function in society without Big Brother holding your hand and blowing your nose for you.


Joe

 

[USP45]

Here's one question i wouldn't mind having to answer "NO" to on a background test form: "Have you ever been a member of or contributed money to an anti-gun rights group?"

How can we expect gun control advocates not to do the very thing we ourselves engage in every chance we get?

???

 

[mikemck]

There seems to be some kind of misunderstanding regarding at least some of what I have posted in this thread.

How can we expect gun control advocates not to do the very thing we ourselves engage in every chance we get?

What I am refering to here is the finger pointing and grandstanding that both sides engage in at every opportunity. This accomplishes nothing at all..
A very good example is the behavior is gun control advocates using the school shootings to try to get more gun control legislation on the books.
It amounts to the same thing, no matter which side does it.

I was in no way trying to infer that gun owners, as a whole or individually, advocated revenge killings.
I was merely pointing out that this thread accomplished nothing at all beyond engaging in the same crap the anti's do.

 

[USP45]

I was merely pointing out that this thread accomplished nothing at all beyond engaging in the same crap the anti's do.

No, this thread puts forth the apparent facts and behaviour of an individual who advocates that we should not be allowed the means to defend ourselves.

Do you think Mr. Smith would be parallized today if he had been carrying a weapon to protect himself with? Maybe... maybe not... but he apparently didn't have any chance without one.

 

[Jeff Thomas]

Well, I too think there is some value in pointing out the hypocrisy of the anti-self defense movement.

And, mikemck, why is it that you so often bait and insult folks here at TFL? It really isn't necessary ... this is hardly the first time.

Regards from AZ

 

[DC]

Dennis, with apologies, I'm closing this thread..

FWIW, it's noteworthy and necessary to post this information and I trust ya'll will continue. Hypocrasy must always be high-lighted.

However, I see this particular thread as hijacked.

Mikemck...you haven't fooled anyone