A sound "like a popping of a balloon" rang out at a Wichita church last May 31 before Dr. George Tiller fell to the ground fatally shot, witnesses told jurors yesterday as the trial opened for a man charged with murdering the abortion provider.
The start of testimony in the case of Scott Roeder, 51, coincided with the 37th anniversary of the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion.
Prosecutors managed to get through the first day of trial without using the word abortion in front of jurors - and have said they do not even want it mentioned. Instead, they tried to focus on the facts - a doctor gunned down in his church.
Roeder, of Kansas City, Mo., has publicly acknowledged shooting Tiller, 67, who specialized in late-term abortions, and has said he killed the doctor to protect unborn children.
I realize they want this trial to be about murder and not about abortion, but isn't it odd that they cannot even mention the word "abortion," yet they were able to show the jurors bloody pictures of the slain doctor? I guess it makes sense, it just strikes me as odd. What do you think?
In another report I read how Roeder had gone out shooting with his brother to practice but the gun kept jamming. They brought it to a gun shop and were told they had been using the wrong cartridges. I guess they weren't very gun savvy.
No one can really blame this one on the gun lovers the way we do when one of them goes rogue. Of course we've got the old lament about gun availability in general. Do you think abortion protesters need to be added to the list of disqualified persons?
What's your opinion? Please leave a comment.
"Do you think abortion protesters need to be added to the list of disqualified persons?"
ReplyDeleteYes. Along with muslims, black people, Mexicans, and any other scary minority.
That's just Common-Sense®.
Dont forget women and faggots as well.
ReplyDelete"Do you think abortion protesters need to be added to the list of disqualified persons?"
ReplyDeleteNo, I don't believe they should. I don't want our country in the business of denying rights for no good reason. My question to you Mike is what is your opinion on the matter? Do you think protestors should have their rights limited?
RuffRidr asked, "My question to you Mike is what is your opinion on the matter? Do you think protestors should have their rights limited?"
ReplyDeleteNot all protesters should be put on the list, but when someone shows signs of being unstable, then yes. I realize this would give the list-keepers too much power, but look at the alternative. The way it is now, too many "lawful gun owners" are going off the deep end. Gun owners should be held to a very high standard.
"Not all protesters should be put on the list, but when someone shows signs of being unstable, then yes."
ReplyDeleteOK, my followup question then would be "do you think all abortion protestors are unstable"?
"The way it is now, too many "lawful gun owners" are going off the deep end."
ReplyDeleteHow many is too many?
1% is too many.
ReplyDeleteRuffRidr asked, "OK, my followup question then would be "do you think all abortion protestors are unstable"?"
ReplyDeleteNo, of course not. Some are gentle souls who wouldn't hurt a fly. But some show clear signs of instability, like this guy.