Shooting Black Teens in Florida? A God Given Right? Another tragedy in Florida

canndo said:
If that is true, that the stand your ground law provides for folks who fear for their lives from teens in a neighboring car and needs no verifyable or reasonable guage of threat - then the stand your ground law is deeply flawed. I could shoot you because you have tats and are 6 foot 5 because I 'feared for my personal safety' A woman could shoot a man who is walking behind her minding his own business but the woman had been raped 15 years ago and constantly "fears for her own safety". A black guy who was assaulted 10 years ago by a band of white teens, upon seeing some at a street corner could claim that he was in fear for his safety and shoot them all. If all we have to have is an unproveable level of fear of one another, then it wouldn't be much of a problem for any insecure person to shoot someone else in public. Hell - I'd have been dead a long long time ago if people were allowed to shoot intimidating men who frightened them.
Click to expand...

None of your scenarios would stand up to scrutiny, see my previous post.
 
nontheist said:
Hmm and I am sure you can prove this statement that white people that kill get favoritism? This should be interesting.
Click to expand...

Where you been nontheist, it has been well known for a long time that blacks get the short end of the legal stick.
 
NoDrama said:
Unless of course the kids said there was a shotgun and that they were gonna kill the dude. If I say I have a gun and am going to kill you you can shoot me, even if it turns out I had no gun you should be exonerated. The law does not say that the defender must ascertain whether or not the threat can be backed up, one only needs to fear for their life.
Click to expand...

loud music makes me fear for my life. justifiable homicide.
 
NoDrama said:
You don't think 9 kids can pummel a man to death? You don't need a gun to kill, the Marines taught me how to take away a knife from someone, flip his ass onto his back while breaking the arm of the assailant and then a hard Marine combat heel to the skull easily crushes him to death. No shotgun needed.

Maybe the kids just said they were gonna kill him?

A terroristic threat is only terroristic when it is obviously not being enforced at the time. If you call me on the phone and say your gonna kill me with your bare hands, does that mean I am justified to drive over and shoot you? If you yell the same thing at me from across the street and then walk away its the same thing, I am not justified in shooting you at all. On the other hand if you say that to my face and then come at me with your fists I get to shoot your ass, even if you only intended to scare me.

The whole defense pivots on the mind of the DEFENDER, if he truly thought his life was in danger beyond any reasonable logic, then he goes free.
Click to expand...


Beyond any reasonable logic - is not a legal test or benchmark. Try again. This sort of a law turns jurisprudence on its head. Now the killer need not prove justification, but only state of mind while the victim is on trial and can rarely defend himself.
 
Harrekin said:
Were you actually there? You know first hand EXACTLY what happened?

If not, opinions are like arseholes...everyone has one and they're all slightly different.
Click to expand...


That saloon door swings both ways and your asshole has been getting quite a workout in this thread.
 
Harrekin said:
Were you actually there? You know first hand EXACTLY what happened?

If not, opinions are like arseholes...everyone has one and they're all slightly different.
Click to expand...


Wrong, opinions are not like assholes, assholes are like assholes. The opinion of a professional of one sort or another is more valid on that professional's subject than other's opinions. The opinion of a learned man on a partucular subject is more valid and more likely to reflect reality than the opinion of one who is not learned on that particular subject. This blurring of distinction to where every statement made by a talking head or a radio talk show host or a blogger is the absolute equivelent of those made by an expert is a sign of the sucessful dumbing down of everyone. If all "opinions" are equal (or slightly different) then it means none are more valid or valuable than any others - just the way the right wishes - so they can pit their lay "opinions" against experts and claim that those lay opinions are as acceptable as any.
 
Harrekin said:
Were you actually there? You know first hand EXACTLY what happened?

If not, opinions are like arseholes...everyone has one and they're all slightly different.
Click to expand...

yeah i was there. i'm black and saw the whole thing. i even hid the shotgun afterwards.
 
UncleBuck said:
yeah i was there. i'm black and saw the whole thing. i even hid the shotgun afterwards.
Click to expand...
My point which you're obviously missing is if the guy murdered someone, he murdered someone.

He couldve had a valid reason or maybe he's just batshit crazy.

But crying "racist! Racist! RACIST!" is premature and pathetically sad at this stage.
 
Harrekin said:
My point which you're obviously missing is if the guy murdered someone, he murdered someone.

He couldve had a valid reason or maybe he's just batshit crazy.

But crying "racist! Racist! RACIST!" is premature and pathetically sad at this stage.
Click to expand...

as i've pointed out already, the guy can't be racist, he has a black co-worker.

i mean, just look at him. no racist looks like that.
 
Harrekin said:
My point which you're obviously missing is if the guy murdered someone, he murdered someone.

He couldve had a valid reason or maybe he's just batshit crazy.

But crying "racist! Racist! RACIST!" is premature and pathetically sad at this stage.
Click to expand...


You and I agree. I held judgement over the Trevon Martin case and I will do the same here - I won't jump to racism but neither will I offer this guy the benefit of the doubt or fall on the side of the stand your ground law - racism is one thing, a law that enables folks to up and shoot other folks because they "feel threatened" looks like a losing proposition. Didn't some black woman try to shelter herself under the same law and fail recently?
 
canndo said:
Where you been nontheist, it has been well known for a long time that blacks get the short end of the legal stick.
Click to expand...

I have seen you chesus and bucky snip but have yet to prove one shred of evidence that white get favoritism on murder trials.
 
canndo said:
You and I agree. I held judgement over the Trevon Martin case and I will do the same here - I won't jump to racism but neither will I offer this guy the benefit of the doubt or fall on the side of the stand your ground law - racism is one thing, a law that enables folks to up and shoot other folks because they "feel threatened" looks like a losing proposition. Didn't some black woman try to shelter herself under the same law and fail recently?
Click to expand...
I think the problem is finding the wording to legislate for a valid self defense.
 
UncleBuck said:
as i've pointed out already, the guy can't be racist, he has a black co-worker.

i mean, just look at him. no racist looks like that.
Click to expand...

You profiling him as a racist is no better than me profiling a black guy as being dangerous.

Hypocrite is being hypocritical
 
So instead of driving away because he didn't like the loud music, he shoots at the car? I can totally see that logic. Those punks were askin for it. Don't you know it's totally fine to shoot some one you start an argument with? I always start arguments with unarmed teen and end them by shooting him. On the daily. Totally logical.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top