|
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
On 6/2/12 5:52 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 6/2/2012 5:24 PM, Canuck57 wrote: On 02/06/2012 10:13 AM, JustWait wrote: On 6/2/2012 11:37 AM, X ` Man wrote: On 6/2/12 10:13 AM, JustWait wrote: On 6/2/2012 9:25 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... In , says... On Fri, 1 Jun 2012 13:21:17 -0400, wrote: http://www.tampabay.com/stand-your-ground-law/ The law is not stupid. The absolute lack of common sense in America is. So is the fact that the richest Americans have, since Eisenhower, gradually bought more and more of the government until today, they own it. A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone. The police are not available to protect you. They are available to document the crimes you have committed or that have been committed against you. Yeah, the stand your ground law lets you kill innocent children, that's great huh? Keeps harry feelin' secure... Uh, we don't have a Florida-like "stand your ground" law, little dummy. If, however, a violent little turd like you breaks into a house down here, it is unlikely anymore than the prosecutors will claim the victims had an "obligation to retreat." In other words, when you break into a house down here, you'll likely be shot. The question is, how good a shot is your intended victim? Will they shoot you dead or just use a shotgun to blow off your legs from the knees down? You should think about that before you engage in home invasion, little putz. Wow, you sure talk tough for a guy who obviously wouldn't have the balls to pull the trigger... LOL! True, harry was too chicken to serve. It's one thing to wave a weapon around but to actually bead down and pull the trigger as you are being bum rushed, is a lot different... Same thing with a knife.. Punks will wave them around and slice at you, but very few have the guts to drive to the chest. harry will pull his widdew cap gun on someone someday and if we are lucky the guy will take it and feed it to him a click at a time... Setting yourself up for a home invasion down here, little putz? |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
X ` Man wrote:
Then, if you aren't referring to Zimmerman, you are totally wrong. Then your statement, "Yeah, the stand your ground law lets you kill innocent children, that's great huh?" is totally false. If Zimmerman walks, it'll be totally true. He won't walk. He'll get manslaughter and life in prison - well deserved. |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
In article , says...
On 6/2/2012 3:51 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 6/2/12 3:21 PM, JustWait wrote: On 6/2/2012 1:57 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 6/2/12 1:16 PM, JustWait wrote: On 6/2/2012 1:09 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 6/2/12 1:05 PM, wrote: On Sat, 2 Jun 2012 10:06:32 -0400, wrote: In , says... On Sat, 2 Jun 2012 09:25:15 -0400, wrote: In , says... In , says... On Fri, 1 Jun 2012 13:21:17 -0400, wrote: http://www.tampabay.com/stand-your-ground-law/ The law is not stupid. The absolute lack of common sense in America is. So is the fact that the richest Americans have, since Eisenhower, gradually bought more and more of the government until today, they own it. A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone. The police are not available to protect you. They are available to document the crimes you have committed or that have been committed against you. Yeah, the stand your ground law lets you kill innocent children, that's great huh? No, the stand your ground law is being mis-applied in this case. Zimmerman drew the line in the sand to stand his ground, but when HE crossed that line, that action made that law inapplicable. Apparently, Florida is common sense challenged. Well true, but I said nothing about Zimmerman. Then, if you aren't referring to Zimmerman, you are totally wrong. Then your statement, "Yeah, the stand your ground law lets you kill innocent children, that's great huh?" is totally false. If Zimmerman walks, it'll be totally true. Guess you are the only one left who hasn't figured out this isn't your meal ticket, virtually all of Zimmermans story has been backed up by the evidence AND witness initial testimony... Why do you think the rest of the race baiters in Congress and the Media have left poor Treyvon Martin behind? Come on harry, try to keep up... The only eyewitness is Zimmerman, and his bail is being revoked because he is a liar. The so-called witnesses have changed their tales several times. Why would it be my meal ticket? I have an income. You're the one who is without a job and the skills to get and hold onto one. I have had the same job since 1994 liar... Your chronic unemployment is not a job, dummy. Tell me Mr. Dr. Karen Grear of Catholic University of America, why do Democrats hate small business so much? What a bigoted question. |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
In article ,
says... On Sat, 02 Jun 2012 13:16:00 -0400, JustWait wrote: On 6/2/2012 1:09 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 6/2/12 1:05 PM, wrote: On Sat, 2 Jun 2012 10:06:32 -0400, wrote: In , says... On Sat, 2 Jun 2012 09:25:15 -0400, wrote: In , says... In , says... On Fri, 1 Jun 2012 13:21:17 -0400, wrote: http://www.tampabay.com/stand-your-ground-law/ The law is not stupid. The absolute lack of common sense in America is. So is the fact that the richest Americans have, since Eisenhower, gradually bought more and more of the government until today, they own it. A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone. The police are not available to protect you. They are available to document the crimes you have committed or that have been committed against you. Yeah, the stand your ground law lets you kill innocent children, that's great huh? No, the stand your ground law is being mis-applied in this case. Zimmerman drew the line in the sand to stand his ground, but when HE crossed that line, that action made that law inapplicable. Apparently, Florida is common sense challenged. Well true, but I said nothing about Zimmerman. Then, if you aren't referring to Zimmerman, you are totally wrong. Then your statement, "Yeah, the stand your ground law lets you kill innocent children, that's great huh?" is totally false. If Zimmerman walks, it'll be totally true. Guess you are the only one left who hasn't figured out this isn't your meal ticket, virtually all of Zimmermans story has been backed up by the evidence AND witness initial testimony... Why do you think the rest of the race baiters in Congress and the Media have left poor Treyvon Martin behind? Come on harry, try to keep up... Zimmerman opened the door for this confrontation. He rightfully deserves a hefty portion of the criminal responsibility. Not all, certainly, but a hefty portion as determined by the courts. The homeowner who hears a commotion outside and who then goes outside and finds someone trying to kill a person. The someone doing the killing turns on the homeowner and lunges at him with a bloody knife and the homeowner kills the guy with his gun. Did the homeowner initiate the confrontation and should the homeowner be bear responsibility for a hefty portion of the criminal responsibility of killing the killer? The problem with the FL law is that the judgment of good shooting or not is made solely by a judge, a single man. That decision should be made by 12. Tell that to the guy in Philly. |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
In article , earl87591
@hotmail.com says... X ` Man wrote: Then, if you aren't referring to Zimmerman, you are totally wrong. Then your statement, "Yeah, the stand your ground law lets you kill innocent children, that's great huh?" is totally false. If Zimmerman walks, it'll be totally true. He won't walk. He'll get manslaughter and life in prison - well deserved. He will walk. |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
In article ,
says... On 02/06/2012 9:42 AM, X ` Man wrote: On 6/2/12 11:33 AM, JustWait wrote: On 6/2/2012 10:48 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... On 6/2/2012 9:25 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... In , says... On Fri, 1 Jun 2012 13:21:17 -0400, wrote: http://www.tampabay.com/stand-your-ground-law/ The law is not stupid. The absolute lack of common sense in America is. So is the fact that the richest Americans have, since Eisenhower, gradually bought more and more of the government until today, they own it. A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone. The police are not available to protect you. They are available to document the crimes you have committed or that have been committed against you. Yeah, the stand your ground law lets you kill innocent children, that's great huh? Keeps harry feelin' secure... Harry's in Maryland..... harry has stated several times here he would shoot anybody who came through his door... and suggests he wouldn't go to prison for it although based on this group postings alone, any judge would probably concur he has been "planning" to shoot someone for a long time... No, **** for brains, I've stated I will shoot any home invader. We have lots of people coming through the door, all invited. But if you tried that - to get inside the house, you would not be an "invitee," and would be considered a home invader. Hey, I know language skills are not your forte. Perhaps someone in your family has the ability to explain simple, declarative sentences to you. Face it harry, you are a hypocrite. Harry's problem is that his definition of home invader is different from the legal definition of home invader. |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
On 6/3/12 8:24 AM, BAR wrote:
In , says... On 02/06/2012 9:42 AM, X ` Man wrote: On 6/2/12 11:33 AM, JustWait wrote: On 6/2/2012 10:48 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... On 6/2/2012 9:25 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... In , says... On Fri, 1 Jun 2012 13:21:17 -0400, wrote: http://www.tampabay.com/stand-your-ground-law/ The law is not stupid. The absolute lack of common sense in America is. So is the fact that the richest Americans have, since Eisenhower, gradually bought more and more of the government until today, they own it. A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone. The police are not available to protect you. They are available to document the crimes you have committed or that have been committed against you. Yeah, the stand your ground law lets you kill innocent children, that's great huh? Keeps harry feelin' secure... Harry's in Maryland..... harry has stated several times here he would shoot anybody who came through his door... and suggests he wouldn't go to prison for it although based on this group postings alone, any judge would probably concur he has been "planning" to shoot someone for a long time... No, **** for brains, I've stated I will shoot any home invader. We have lots of people coming through the door, all invited. But if you tried that - to get inside the house, you would not be an "invitee," and would be considered a home invader. Hey, I know language skills are not your forte. Perhaps someone in your family has the ability to explain simple, declarative sentences to you. Face it harry, you are a hypocrite. Harry's problem is that his definition of home invader is different from the legal definition of home invader. There is no "the legal definition" of home invader, Mr. Uneducated. There are many definitions of the term in use. For me, a home invader is a criminal who breaks into or forces his way into your house with criminal intent while people are at home. If no one is at home, it's burglary. My assumption is that if someone breaks in here while we are at home, he's intent on causing physical harm. It's not necessarily easy to "retreat." Your slow-witted right-wing buddy JustHate has implied any number of times that he'd try to *push* his way in here. That is home invasion. If he tried that, he'd be leaving on a gurney or in a body bag, and I'd probably get an award for improving the gene pool. |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
On 6/3/2012 8:53 AM, X ` Man wrote:
Your slow-witted right-wing buddy JustHate has implied any number of times that he'd try to *push* his way in here. That is home invasion. If he tried that, he'd be leaving on a gurney or in a body bag, and I'd probably get an award for improving the gene pool. Doubt it. Show us one instance where you imagined he made that implication. You got some crazy ideas floating around in that swelled head of yours. |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
On Sat, 02 Jun 2012 09:35:15 -0400, wrote:
On Sat, 2 Jun 2012 09:25:15 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: In article , says... In article , says... On Fri, 1 Jun 2012 13:21:17 -0400, iBoaterer wrote: http://www.tampabay.com/stand-your-ground-law/ The law is not stupid. The absolute lack of common sense in America is. So is the fact that the richest Americans have, since Eisenhower, gradually bought more and more of the government until today, they own it. A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone. The police are not available to protect you. They are available to document the crimes you have committed or that have been committed against you. Yeah, the stand your ground law lets you kill innocent children, that's great huh? No, the stand your ground law is being mis-applied in this case. Zimmerman drew the line in the sand to stand his ground, but when HE crossed that line, that action made that law inapplicable. Apparently, Florida is common sense challenged. Perhaps that's a true statement. But if Zimmerman is guilty and found guilty, then there must be some folks down there with good sense, no? Of course, if he is not guilty and found not guilty, then there will be many who reiterate your comment. |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
In article , dump-on-
says... On 6/3/12 8:24 AM, BAR wrote: In , says... On 02/06/2012 9:42 AM, X ` Man wrote: On 6/2/12 11:33 AM, JustWait wrote: On 6/2/2012 10:48 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... On 6/2/2012 9:25 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... In , says... On Fri, 1 Jun 2012 13:21:17 -0400, wrote: http://www.tampabay.com/stand-your-ground-law/ The law is not stupid. The absolute lack of common sense in America is. So is the fact that the richest Americans have, since Eisenhower, gradually bought more and more of the government until today, they own it. A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone. The police are not available to protect you. They are available to document the crimes you have committed or that have been committed against you. Yeah, the stand your ground law lets you kill innocent children, that's great huh? Keeps harry feelin' secure... Harry's in Maryland..... harry has stated several times here he would shoot anybody who came through his door... and suggests he wouldn't go to prison for it although based on this group postings alone, any judge would probably concur he has been "planning" to shoot someone for a long time... No, **** for brains, I've stated I will shoot any home invader. We have lots of people coming through the door, all invited. But if you tried that - to get inside the house, you would not be an "invitee," and would be considered a home invader. Hey, I know language skills are not your forte. Perhaps someone in your family has the ability to explain simple, declarative sentences to you. Face it harry, you are a hypocrite. Harry's problem is that his definition of home invader is different from the legal definition of home invader. There is no "the legal definition" of home invader, Mr. Uneducated. Really, fool? http://definitions.uslegal.com/h/home-invasion/ |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
On 6/3/12 8:53 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 3 Jun 2012 08:22:12 -0400, wrote: In , says... On Sat, 02 Jun 2012 13:16:00 -0400, wrote: On 6/2/2012 1:09 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 6/2/12 1:05 PM, wrote: On Sat, 2 Jun 2012 10:06:32 -0400, wrote: In , says... On Sat, 2 Jun 2012 09:25:15 -0400, wrote: In , says... In , says... On Fri, 1 Jun 2012 13:21:17 -0400, wrote: http://www.tampabay.com/stand-your-ground-law/ The law is not stupid. The absolute lack of common sense in America is. So is the fact that the richest Americans have, since Eisenhower, gradually bought more and more of the government until today, they own it. A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone. The police are not available to protect you. They are available to document the crimes you have committed or that have been committed against you. Yeah, the stand your ground law lets you kill innocent children, that's great huh? No, the stand your ground law is being mis-applied in this case. Zimmerman drew the line in the sand to stand his ground, but when HE crossed that line, that action made that law inapplicable. Apparently, Florida is common sense challenged. Well true, but I said nothing about Zimmerman. Then, if you aren't referring to Zimmerman, you are totally wrong. Then your statement, "Yeah, the stand your ground law lets you kill innocent children, that's great huh?" is totally false. If Zimmerman walks, it'll be totally true. Guess you are the only one left who hasn't figured out this isn't your meal ticket, virtually all of Zimmermans story has been backed up by the evidence AND witness initial testimony... Why do you think the rest of the race baiters in Congress and the Media have left poor Treyvon Martin behind? Come on harry, try to keep up... Zimmerman opened the door for this confrontation. He rightfully deserves a hefty portion of the criminal responsibility. Not all, certainly, but a hefty portion as determined by the courts. The homeowner who hears a commotion outside and who then goes outside and finds someone trying to kill a person. The someone doing the killing turns on the homeowner and lunges at him with a bloody knife and the homeowner kills the guy with his gun. Did the homeowner initiate the confrontation and should the homeowner be bear responsibility for a hefty portion of the criminal responsibility of killing the killer? Apples and Oranges. Now, you are talking (1) castle doctrine and (2) a felonious act being committed. The problem with the FL law is that the judgment of good shooting or not is made solely by a judge, a single man. That decision should be made by 12. Tell that to the guy in Philly. He probably already knows that. The Castle Doctrine Act there requires the "good shooting" decision to be made by the DA. There is no single law in the United States that covers the so-called "Castle Doctrine." Instead, we have the usual state-by-state patchwork of laws pertaining to that and to what you can do if you are a victim of a home invader. Castle Doctrine laws, however, typically aren't like Florida's idiotic "stand your ground" law. Under Castle Doctrine, you typically have to be inside your "castle" (house) and warding off someone who broke or forced their way in. Walking down the street of your subdivision, challenging a kid you don't like, chasing after him, getting into a fight and then shooting him is likely to get you convicted of a serious felony in Maryland. |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
|
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
On 6/3/12 10:00 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Sun, 03 Jun 2012 08:46:19 -0400, wrote: Bottom line for anybody with an IQ over about 3, if you are pursuing somebody, you are not STANDING your ground, you are COVERING ground. See the difference? === At least in Florida, not sure about other places, you are allowed to use deadly force to prevent the commission of a violent felony, even if requires pursuit. That is not "stand your ground" law however. In Florida, a violent felony means minding your own business while walking to the house where your dad is staying, armed with a soft drink and a bag of candy. In those circumstances, a self-appointed vigilante can confront you, get into a fight and then shoot you. Viva la Florida. |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
On 6/3/2012 10:00 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Sun, 03 Jun 2012 08:46:19 -0400, wrote: Bottom line for anybody with an IQ over about 3, if you are pursuing somebody, you are not STANDING your ground, you are COVERING ground. See the difference? === At least in Florida, not sure about other places, you are allowed to use deadly force to prevent the commission of a violent felony, even if requires pursuit. That is not "stand your ground" law however. Still apples and oranges. Although Zimmerman followed Martin till the cops told him to stop. All the evidence so far leads to the conclusion Martin initiated the contact, and started the fight.. So all this other **** doesn't matter, at the time of the shooting, Zimmerman was "standing his ground"... Period... |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
On 6/3/2012 8:24 AM, BAR wrote:
In , says... On 02/06/2012 9:42 AM, X ` Man wrote: On 6/2/12 11:33 AM, JustWait wrote: On 6/2/2012 10:48 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... On 6/2/2012 9:25 AM, iBoaterer wrote: In , says... In , says... On Fri, 1 Jun 2012 13:21:17 -0400, wrote: http://www.tampabay.com/stand-your-ground-law/ The law is not stupid. The absolute lack of common sense in America is. So is the fact that the richest Americans have, since Eisenhower, gradually bought more and more of the government until today, they own it. A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone. The police are not available to protect you. They are available to document the crimes you have committed or that have been committed against you. Yeah, the stand your ground law lets you kill innocent children, that's great huh? Keeps harry feelin' secure... Harry's in Maryland..... harry has stated several times here he would shoot anybody who came through his door... and suggests he wouldn't go to prison for it although based on this group postings alone, any judge would probably concur he has been "planning" to shoot someone for a long time... No, **** for brains, I've stated I will shoot any home invader. We have lots of people coming through the door, all invited. But if you tried that - to get inside the house, you would not be an "invitee," and would be considered a home invader. Hey, I know language skills are not your forte. Perhaps someone in your family has the ability to explain simple, declarative sentences to you. Face it harry, you are a hypocrite. Harry's problem is that his definition of home invader is different from the legal definition of home invader. All of harrys definitions are based on convenience and self indulgence...... |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
On 6/3/2012 9:10 AM, Oscar wrote:
On 6/3/2012 8:53 AM, X ` Man wrote: Your slow-witted right-wing buddy JustHate has implied any number of times that he'd try to *push* his way in here. That is home invasion. If he tried that, he'd be leaving on a gurney or in a body bag, and I'd probably get an award for improving the gene pool. Doubt it. Show us one instance where you imagined he made that implication. You got some crazy ideas floating around in that swelled head of yours. That is absolutly nuts.. I AM sending this one off to his local cops, it's obvious he is setting up to shoot me. Glad I know this so if I ever run into him I know to shoot first since he is trying to kill me anyway... |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
On 6/3/12 10:20 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 6/3/2012 9:10 AM, Oscar wrote: On 6/3/2012 8:53 AM, X ` Man wrote: Your slow-witted right-wing buddy JustHate has implied any number of times that he'd try to *push* his way in here. That is home invasion. If he tried that, he'd be leaving on a gurney or in a body bag, and I'd probably get an award for improving the gene pool. Doubt it. Show us one instance where you imagined he made that implication. You got some crazy ideas floating around in that swelled head of yours. That is absolutly nuts.. I AM sending this one off to his local cops, it's obvious he is setting up to shoot me. Glad I know this so if I ever run into him I know to shoot first since he is trying to kill me anyway... You're going to tell the police that *if* you home invade or push your way in here, your violence will be met appropriately? That should make them giggle. |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
In article ,
says... On Sun, 3 Jun 2012 08:22:12 -0400, BAR wrote: In article , says... On Sat, 02 Jun 2012 13:16:00 -0400, JustWait wrote: On 6/2/2012 1:09 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 6/2/12 1:05 PM, wrote: On Sat, 2 Jun 2012 10:06:32 -0400, wrote: In , says... On Sat, 2 Jun 2012 09:25:15 -0400, wrote: In , says... In , says... On Fri, 1 Jun 2012 13:21:17 -0400, wrote: http://www.tampabay.com/stand-your-ground-law/ The law is not stupid. The absolute lack of common sense in America is. So is the fact that the richest Americans have, since Eisenhower, gradually bought more and more of the government until today, they own it. A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone. The police are not available to protect you. They are available to document the crimes you have committed or that have been committed against you. Yeah, the stand your ground law lets you kill innocent children, that's great huh? No, the stand your ground law is being mis-applied in this case. Zimmerman drew the line in the sand to stand his ground, but when HE crossed that line, that action made that law inapplicable. Apparently, Florida is common sense challenged. Well true, but I said nothing about Zimmerman. Then, if you aren't referring to Zimmerman, you are totally wrong. Then your statement, "Yeah, the stand your ground law lets you kill innocent children, that's great huh?" is totally false. If Zimmerman walks, it'll be totally true. Guess you are the only one left who hasn't figured out this isn't your meal ticket, virtually all of Zimmermans story has been backed up by the evidence AND witness initial testimony... Why do you think the rest of the race baiters in Congress and the Media have left poor Treyvon Martin behind? Come on harry, try to keep up... Zimmerman opened the door for this confrontation. He rightfully deserves a hefty portion of the criminal responsibility. Not all, certainly, but a hefty portion as determined by the courts. The homeowner who hears a commotion outside and who then goes outside and finds someone trying to kill a person. The someone doing the killing turns on the homeowner and lunges at him with a bloody knife and the homeowner kills the guy with his gun. Did the homeowner initiate the confrontation and should the homeowner be bear responsibility for a hefty portion of the criminal responsibility of killing the killer? Apples and Oranges. Now, you are talking (1) castle doctrine and (2) a felonious act being committed. I said nothing about the castle doctrine. I was addressing the issue of Zimmerman exiting his vehicle with a person walking out of his house after hearing a commotion. You are the one who put the castle doctrine into plan in this scenario. I was talking about the hefty portion of the criminal responsibility. The problem with the FL law is that the judgment of good shooting or not is made solely by a judge, a single man. That decision should be made by 12. Tell that to the guy in Philly. He probably already knows that. The Castle Doctrine Act there requires the "good shooting" decision to be made by the DA. The judge found him guilty, not a jury. |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
|
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
On Sun, 03 Jun 2012 10:18:08 -0400, JustWait
wrote: Still apples and oranges. Although Zimmerman followed Martin till the cops told him to stop. All the evidence so far leads to the conclusion Martin initiated the contact, and started the fight.. So all this other **** doesn't matter, at the time of the shooting, Zimmerman was "standing his ground"... Period... === There are a lot of very murky legal issues tangled up in this case. I don't think it's a slam dunk for either side. |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
On 6/3/2012 10:26 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 6/3/12 10:20 AM, JustWait wrote: On 6/3/2012 9:10 AM, Oscar wrote: On 6/3/2012 8:53 AM, X ` Man wrote: Your slow-witted right-wing buddy JustHate has implied any number of times that he'd try to *push* his way in here. That is home invasion. If he tried that, he'd be leaving on a gurney or in a body bag, and I'd probably get an award for improving the gene pool. Doubt it. Show us one instance where you imagined he made that implication. You got some crazy ideas floating around in that swelled head of yours. That is absolutly nuts.. I AM sending this one off to his local cops, it's obvious he is setting up to shoot me. Glad I know this so if I ever run into him I know to shoot first since he is trying to kill me anyway... You're going to tell the police that *if* you home invade or push your way in here, your violence will be met appropriately? That should make them giggle. No, I am going to show them what a fantasy world you live in, imagining to yourself, in your basement, that I ever said anything ever about pushing in your doors.. You are delusional harry... |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
On 6/3/2012 10:47 AM, BAR wrote:
In aweb.com, says... On 6/3/2012 8:53 AM, X ` Man wrote: Your slow-witted right-wing buddy JustHate has implied any number of times that he'd try to *push* his way in here. That is home invasion. If he tried that, he'd be leaving on a gurney or in a body bag, and I'd probably get an award for improving the gene pool. Doubt it. Show us one instance where you imagined he made that implication. You got some crazy ideas floating around in that swelled head of yours. Harry has an itchy trigger finger. I wouldn't be surprised if he walks around the house with a hog leg strapped to his side. Maybe a porkchop around his neck so dr3 will pay attention to him...:) |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
In article , says...
On 6/3/2012 10:00 AM, Wayne.B wrote: On Sun, 03 Jun 2012 08:46:19 -0400, wrote: Bottom line for anybody with an IQ over about 3, if you are pursuing somebody, you are not STANDING your ground, you are COVERING ground. See the difference? === At least in Florida, not sure about other places, you are allowed to use deadly force to prevent the commission of a violent felony, even if requires pursuit. That is not "stand your ground" law however. Still apples and oranges. Although Zimmerman followed Martin till the cops told him to stop. All the evidence so far leads to the conclusion That is yet another one of your lies. He didn't follow Martin "till the cops told him to stop". He continued after they told him that it's not a good idea. Martin initiated the contact, and started the fight.. So all this other You don't know that. **** doesn't matter, at the time of the shooting, Zimmerman was "standing his ground"... Period... Bull****. |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
|
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
In article ,
says... In article m, says... On 6/3/2012 8:53 AM, X ` Man wrote: Your slow-witted right-wing buddy JustHate has implied any number of times that he'd try to *push* his way in here. That is home invasion. If he tried that, he'd be leaving on a gurney or in a body bag, and I'd probably get an award for improving the gene pool. Doubt it. Show us one instance where you imagined he made that implication. You got some crazy ideas floating around in that swelled head of yours. Harry has an itchy trigger finger. I wouldn't be surprised if he walks around the house with a hog leg strapped to his side. Because he's a coward. |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
On 6/3/2012 9:34 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 6/3/12 8:53 AM, wrote: On Sun, 3 Jun 2012 08:22:12 -0400, wrote: In , says... On Sat, 02 Jun 2012 13:16:00 -0400, wrote: On 6/2/2012 1:09 PM, X ` Man wrote: On 6/2/12 1:05 PM, wrote: On Sat, 2 Jun 2012 10:06:32 -0400, wrote: In , says... On Sat, 2 Jun 2012 09:25:15 -0400, wrote: In , says... In , says... On Fri, 1 Jun 2012 13:21:17 -0400, wrote: http://www.tampabay.com/stand-your-ground-law/ The law is not stupid. The absolute lack of common sense in America is. So is the fact that the richest Americans have, since Eisenhower, gradually bought more and more of the government until today, they own it. A gun in the hand is better than a cop on the phone. The police are not available to protect you. They are available to document the crimes you have committed or that have been committed against you. Yeah, the stand your ground law lets you kill innocent children, that's great huh? No, the stand your ground law is being mis-applied in this case. Zimmerman drew the line in the sand to stand his ground, but when HE crossed that line, that action made that law inapplicable. Apparently, Florida is common sense challenged. Well true, but I said nothing about Zimmerman. Then, if you aren't referring to Zimmerman, you are totally wrong. Then your statement, "Yeah, the stand your ground law lets you kill innocent children, that's great huh?" is totally false. If Zimmerman walks, it'll be totally true. Guess you are the only one left who hasn't figured out this isn't your meal ticket, virtually all of Zimmermans story has been backed up by the evidence AND witness initial testimony... Why do you think the rest of the race baiters in Congress and the Media have left poor Treyvon Martin behind? Come on harry, try to keep up... Zimmerman opened the door for this confrontation. He rightfully deserves a hefty portion of the criminal responsibility. Not all, certainly, but a hefty portion as determined by the courts. The homeowner who hears a commotion outside and who then goes outside and finds someone trying to kill a person. The someone doing the killing turns on the homeowner and lunges at him with a bloody knife and the homeowner kills the guy with his gun. Did the homeowner initiate the confrontation and should the homeowner be bear responsibility for a hefty portion of the criminal responsibility of killing the killer? Apples and Oranges. Now, you are talking (1) castle doctrine and (2) a felonious act being committed. The problem with the FL law is that the judgment of good shooting or not is made solely by a judge, a single man. That decision should be made by 12. Tell that to the guy in Philly. He probably already knows that. The Castle Doctrine Act there requires the "good shooting" decision to be made by the DA. There is no single law in the United States that covers the so-called "Castle Doctrine." Instead, we have the usual state-by-state patchwork of laws pertaining to that and to what you can do if you are a victim of a home invader. Castle Doctrine laws, however, typically aren't like Florida's idiotic "stand your ground" law. Under Castle Doctrine, you typically have to be inside your "castle" (house) and warding off someone who broke or forced their way in. Walking down the street of your subdivision, challenging a kid you don't like, chasing after him, getting into a fight and then shooting him is likely to get you convicted of a serious felony in Maryland. Mister writer guy, you made a couple of mistakes. Make it Challenging a young man you don't recognize. How about monitoring his movements because you are suspicious of him. It appears from all accounts that Treevon was the fighter and Zimmerman was defending himself against the attacker, Treevon. Zimmerman will likely walk. |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
On 6/3/2012 10:08 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 6/3/12 10:00 AM, Wayne.B wrote: On Sun, 03 Jun 2012 08:46:19 -0400, wrote: Bottom line for anybody with an IQ over about 3, if you are pursuing somebody, you are not STANDING your ground, you are COVERING ground. See the difference? === At least in Florida, not sure about other places, you are allowed to use deadly force to prevent the commission of a violent felony, even if requires pursuit. That is not "stand your ground" law however. In Florida, a violent felony means minding your own business while walking to the house where your dad is staying, armed with a soft drink and a bag of candy. In those circumstances, a self-appointed vigilante can confront you, get into a fight and then shoot you. Viva la Florida. What! Treevon's dad didn't even live at the complex? So Treevon was visiting a visitor to the complex? No wonder Zimmerman asked what Treevon was doing there. I can only imagine what kind of punkish response Treevon gave. |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
On 6/3/12 10:47 AM, BAR wrote:
In aweb.com, says... On 6/3/2012 8:53 AM, X ` Man wrote: Your slow-witted right-wing buddy JustHate has implied any number of times that he'd try to *push* his way in here. That is home invasion. If he tried that, he'd be leaving on a gurney or in a body bag, and I'd probably get an award for improving the gene pool. Doubt it. Show us one instance where you imagined he made that implication. You got some crazy ideas floating around in that swelled head of yours. Harry has an itchy trigger finger. I wouldn't be surprised if he walks around the house with a hog leg strapped to his side. It's interesting how you and the other mostly uneducated righties come to such wild, bizarre conclusions. |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
On 6/3/2012 10:18 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 6/3/2012 10:00 AM, Wayne.B wrote: On Sun, 03 Jun 2012 08:46:19 -0400, wrote: Bottom line for anybody with an IQ over about 3, if you are pursuing somebody, you are not STANDING your ground, you are COVERING ground. See the difference? === At least in Florida, not sure about other places, you are allowed to use deadly force to prevent the commission of a violent felony, even if requires pursuit. That is not "stand your ground" law however. Still apples and oranges. Although Zimmerman followed Martin till the cops told him to stop. All the evidence so far leads to the conclusion Martin initiated the contact, and started the fight.. So all this other **** doesn't matter, at the time of the shooting, Zimmerman was "standing his ground"... Period... Not quite correct. At the time of the shooting, Treevon was sitting on top of the prone Zimmerman beating the **** out of him. Pardon my French. That looks more like self defense than stand your ground. |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
On 6/3/2012 10:47 AM, BAR wrote:
In aweb.com, says... On 6/3/2012 8:53 AM, X ` Man wrote: Your slow-witted right-wing buddy JustHate has implied any number of times that he'd try to *push* his way in here. That is home invasion. If he tried that, he'd be leaving on a gurney or in a body bag, and I'd probably get an award for improving the gene pool. Doubt it. Show us one instance where you imagined he made that implication. You got some crazy ideas floating around in that swelled head of yours. Harry has an itchy trigger finger. I wouldn't be surprised if he walks around the house with a hog leg strapped to his side. Makes you wonder how an obviously insane person like him can legally get his hands on firearms. Something has to be wrong with the system. |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
In article m,
says... On 6/3/2012 10:47 AM, BAR wrote: In aweb.com, says... On 6/3/2012 8:53 AM, X ` Man wrote: Your slow-witted right-wing buddy JustHate has implied any number of times that he'd try to *push* his way in here. That is home invasion. If he tried that, he'd be leaving on a gurney or in a body bag, and I'd probably get an award for improving the gene pool. Doubt it. Show us one instance where you imagined he made that implication. You got some crazy ideas floating around in that swelled head of yours. Harry has an itchy trigger finger. I wouldn't be surprised if he walks around the house with a hog leg strapped to his side. Makes you wonder how an obviously insane person like him can legally get his hands on firearms. Something has to be wrong with the system. There is no sanity test for voting or owning firearms. |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
On 6/3/12 12:28 PM, BAR wrote:
In aweb.com, says... On 6/3/2012 10:47 AM, BAR wrote: In aweb.com, says... On 6/3/2012 8:53 AM, X ` Man wrote: Your slow-witted right-wing buddy JustHate has implied any number of times that he'd try to *push* his way in here. That is home invasion. If he tried that, he'd be leaving on a gurney or in a body bag, and I'd probably get an award for improving the gene pool. Doubt it. Show us one instance where you imagined he made that implication. You got some crazy ideas floating around in that swelled head of yours. Harry has an itchy trigger finger. I wouldn't be surprised if he walks around the house with a hog leg strapped to his side. Makes you wonder how an obviously insane person like him can legally get his hands on firearms. Something has to be wrong with the system. There is no sanity test for voting or owning firearms. There are "sanity" questions and if you lie, you face felony charges. You'd best stick to water pistols. |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
On 6/3/2012 11:09 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Sun, 03 Jun 2012 10:18:08 -0400, wrote: Still apples and oranges. Although Zimmerman followed Martin till the cops told him to stop. All the evidence so far leads to the conclusion Martin initiated the contact, and started the fight.. So all this other **** doesn't matter, at the time of the shooting, Zimmerman was "standing his ground"... Period... === There are a lot of very murky legal issues tangled up in this case. I don't think it's a slam dunk for either side. Common sense would suggest that the law would specifically pertain to the moment the trigger was pulled. Based on the evidence we have so far, at the moment he pulled the trigger, Zimmerman was in a life threatening position with no egress as he was pinned to the ground and getting a "MMA style beating according to the eye witness account... At the same time, watching or even following someone is not a life threatening event so it would stand to reason Martin had no legal reason to jump on Zimmerman and try to kill him... It's really too bad half the country can't get far enough around their own ideology and bias to see that this was a terrible event, but Martin could have avoided it as well as Zimmerman by not jumping on Zimmerman and trying to kill him... Unfortunately the racists here, in congress, and in the media can't see this because of nothing matters to them but inventing a racial aspect in an election year.... |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
On 6/3/2012 11:17 AM, iBoaterer wrote:
In , says... On 6/3/2012 10:00 AM, Wayne.B wrote: On Sun, 03 Jun 2012 08:46:19 -0400, wrote: Bottom line for anybody with an IQ over about 3, if you are pursuing somebody, you are not STANDING your ground, you are COVERING ground. See the difference? === At least in Florida, not sure about other places, you are allowed to use deadly force to prevent the commission of a violent felony, even if requires pursuit. That is not "stand your ground" law however. Still apples and oranges. Although Zimmerman followed Martin till the cops told him to stop. All the evidence so far leads to the conclusion That is yet another one of your lies. He didn't follow Martin "till the cops told him to stop". He continued after they told him that it's not a good idea. Martin initiated the contact, and started the fight.. So all this other You don't know that. **** doesn't matter, at the time of the shooting, Zimmerman was "standing his ground"... Period... Bull****. The evidence presented in court backs up my supposition. If you were not a racist, you could see that.. |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
On 6/3/2012 11:49 AM, Oscar wrote:
On 6/3/2012 10:18 AM, JustWait wrote: On 6/3/2012 10:00 AM, Wayne.B wrote: On Sun, 03 Jun 2012 08:46:19 -0400, wrote: Bottom line for anybody with an IQ over about 3, if you are pursuing somebody, you are not STANDING your ground, you are COVERING ground. See the difference? === At least in Florida, not sure about other places, you are allowed to use deadly force to prevent the commission of a violent felony, even if requires pursuit. That is not "stand your ground" law however. Still apples and oranges. Although Zimmerman followed Martin till the cops told him to stop. All the evidence so far leads to the conclusion Martin initiated the contact, and started the fight.. So all this other **** doesn't matter, at the time of the shooting, Zimmerman was "standing his ground"... Period... Not quite correct. At the time of the shooting, Treevon was sitting on top of the prone Zimmerman beating the **** out of him. Pardon my French. That looks more like self defense than stand your ground. The fact is according to all the evidence we have available, Zimmerman had NO egress and his life was being threatened at at the time. |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
On 6/3/12 4:49 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 6/3/2012 11:09 AM, Wayne.B wrote: On Sun, 03 Jun 2012 10:18:08 -0400, wrote: Still apples and oranges. Although Zimmerman followed Martin till the cops told him to stop. All the evidence so far leads to the conclusion Martin initiated the contact, and started the fight.. So all this other **** doesn't matter, at the time of the shooting, Zimmerman was "standing his ground"... Period... === There are a lot of very murky legal issues tangled up in this case. I don't think it's a slam dunk for either side. Common sense would suggest that the law would specifically pertain to the moment the trigger was pulled. Based on the evidence we have so far, at the moment he pulled the trigger, Zimmerman was in a life threatening position with no egress as he was pinned to the ground and getting a "MMA style beating according to the eye witness account... At the same time, watching or even following someone is not a life threatening event so it would stand to reason Martin had no legal reason to jump on Zimmerman and try to kill him... It's really too bad half the country can't get far enough around their own ideology and bias to see that this was a terrible event, but Martin could have avoided it as well as Zimmerman by not jumping on Zimmerman and trying to kill him... Unfortunately the racists here, in congress, and in the media can't see this because of nothing matters to them but inventing a racial aspect in an election year.... Hilarious, just hilarious. You barely finished high school, you've never even held a responsible job, and you're pontificating on legal matters. What's next, your take on ion drive for spaceships? |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
On 6/3/2012 12:00 PM, Oscar wrote:
On 6/3/2012 10:47 AM, BAR wrote: In aweb.com, says... On 6/3/2012 8:53 AM, X ` Man wrote: Your slow-witted right-wing buddy JustHate has implied any number of times that he'd try to *push* his way in here. That is home invasion. If he tried that, he'd be leaving on a gurney or in a body bag, and I'd probably get an award for improving the gene pool. Doubt it. Show us one instance where you imagined he made that implication. You got some crazy ideas floating around in that swelled head of yours. Harry has an itchy trigger finger. I wouldn't be surprised if he walks around the house with a hog leg strapped to his side. Makes you wonder how an obviously insane person like him can legally get his hands on firearms. Something has to be wrong with the system. Do you really believe he has firearms?? LOL!!! |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
On 6/3/12 4:51 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 6/3/2012 11:49 AM, Oscar wrote: On 6/3/2012 10:18 AM, JustWait wrote: On 6/3/2012 10:00 AM, Wayne.B wrote: On Sun, 03 Jun 2012 08:46:19 -0400, wrote: Bottom line for anybody with an IQ over about 3, if you are pursuing somebody, you are not STANDING your ground, you are COVERING ground. See the difference? === At least in Florida, not sure about other places, you are allowed to use deadly force to prevent the commission of a violent felony, even if requires pursuit. That is not "stand your ground" law however. Still apples and oranges. Although Zimmerman followed Martin till the cops told him to stop. All the evidence so far leads to the conclusion Martin initiated the contact, and started the fight.. So all this other **** doesn't matter, at the time of the shooting, Zimmerman was "standing his ground"... Period... Not quite correct. At the time of the shooting, Treevon was sitting on top of the prone Zimmerman beating the **** out of him. Pardon my French. That looks more like self defense than stand your ground. The fact is according to all the evidence we have available, Zimmerman had NO egress and his life was being threatened at at the time. JustSnot has seen the videotape that no one else has. |
The utter stupidity of the stand your ground law
On Jun 3, 5:52*pm, X ` Man dump-on-conservati...@anywhere-you-
can.com wrote: On 6/3/12 4:49 PM, JustWait wrote: On 6/3/2012 11:09 AM, Wayne.B wrote: On Sun, 03 Jun 2012 10:18:08 -0400, wrote: Still apples and oranges. Although Zimmerman followed Martin till the cops told him to stop. All the evidence so far leads to the conclusion Martin initiated the contact, and started the fight.. So all this other **** doesn't matter, at the time of the shooting, Zimmerman was "standing his ground"... Period... === There are a lot of very murky legal issues tangled up in this case. I don't think it's a slam dunk for either side. Common sense would suggest that the law would specifically pertain to the moment the trigger was pulled. Based on the evidence we have so far, at the moment he pulled the trigger, Zimmerman was in a life threatening position with no egress as he was pinned to the ground and getting a "MMA style beating according to the eye witness account... At the same time, watching or even following someone is not a life threatening event so it would stand to reason Martin had no legal reason to jump on Zimmerman and try to kill him... It's really too bad half the country can't get far enough around their own ideology and bias to see that this was a terrible event, but Martin could have avoided it as well as Zimmerman by not jumping on Zimmerman and trying to kill him... Unfortunately the racists here, in congress, and in the media can't see this because of nothing matters to them but inventing a racial aspect in an election year.... Hilarious, just hilarious. You barely finished high school, you've never even held a responsible job, and you're pontificating on legal matters. What's next, your take on ion drive for spaceships? Well, he is a bona fida space cadet. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:13 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com