Trayvon Martin

[Jenksismyhero]

But no one is saying anything like this about, for example, the people who successfully pushed for expansion of Florida's gun laws. Those laws are insane, but people stopped paying attention to how insane it is to have people riding around in their trucks armed to the teeth starting fights (and dealing with the black suspicious looking people appropriately).

 

I love how going to an extreme is terrible in one sense (oh look, a black kid, he must be suspicious) but perfectly fine in another (anyone who wants to own a gun is just "arming" themselves to pick fights and kill people). Yep.

 

[Texsox]

But no one is saying anything like this about, for example, the people who successfully pushed for expansion of Florida's gun laws. Those laws are insane, but people stopped paying attention to how insane it is to have people riding around in their trucks armed to the teeth starting fights (and dealing with the black suspicious looking people appropriately).

 

 

I really do not find it insane to allow law abiding citizens to own just about any gun. I find it insane when we write laws that will restrict law abiding citizens and that will not change the behavior of the criminals who the laws are meant to restrict.

[Soxbadger]

The laws are meant to restrict everyone not just criminals.

 

Gun control isnt just about criminals, its about kids who get their hands on their parents guns and shoot themselves accidentally, its about untrained civilians using weapons on the street and harming another innocent, its about whether as a society guns are necessary to protect ourselves from common criminals.

 

Some of us have a fundamental difference of opinion on guns and society. I do not read the 2nd Amendment the same way it is currently interpreted, but, that does not change my core belief.

 

 

[Jenksismyhero]

The laws are meant to restrict everyone not just criminals.

 

Gun control isnt just about criminals, its about kids who get their hands on their parents guns and shoot themselves accidentally, its about untrained civilians using weapons on the street and harming another innocent, its about whether as a society guns are necessary to protect ourselves from common criminals.

 

Some of us have a fundamental difference of opinion on guns and society. I do not read the 2nd Amendment the same way it is currently interpreted, but, that does not change my core belief.

 

Guns aren't strictly about protection from criminals.

[Soxbadger]

Hunting?

 

You can hunt with a bow and arrow, and Im also not very keen on killing animals for sport.

[StrangeSox]

Populist uprisings.

[StrangeSox]

Also target shooting, which is fun.

[Y2HH]

The laws are meant to restrict everyone not just criminals.

 

Gun control isnt just about criminals, its about kids who get their hands on their parents guns and shoot themselves accidentally, its about untrained civilians using weapons on the street and harming another innocent, its about whether as a society guns are necessary to protect ourselves from common criminals.

 

Some of us have a fundamental difference of opinion on guns and society. I do not read the 2nd Amendment the same way it is currently interpreted, but, that does not change my core belief.

 

They're meant to restrict everyone, but in effect, they only restrict those that follow the law (aka the law abiding citizen)...and that's what Tex is saying...that's what I'm saying...that's what most people are saying. It defangs the lawful while arming the unlawful.

 

And yes, while it's about all of those things...the damn things exist...they're not going to "unexist" now. Gun laws, as they are today, are as failed as the war on drugs...but of course those who believe in the war on drugs disagree...just as those that believe in gun laws working would disagree. And round and round we go...and in the mean time nothing gets fixed.

[Soxbadger]

And that is why reasonable people have to come to reasonable agreements.

 

For example, while I may think it would be best if every gun was confiscated and destroyed, I do understand that there is no way to completely stop criminal activity. Thus we have to be honest and admit that criminals will likely have weapons. Due to that, it seems reasonable to allow people to have weapons on their property.

 

But that in my opinion is where the reasonableness of allowing guns ends. Now, I could potentially be persuaded on carrying weapons in public, but, there would need to be training associated with that. There would need to be extremely strict laws, with almost no benefit of the doubt being given to the use of deadly force.

 

Drugs are different. They for the most part only harm the individual taking them, it makes no sense to restrict that, it makes sense to increase criminal penalties for crimes committed while intoxicated.

[mr_genius]

With all the hate filled race baiting hysteria from the media, this stuff was bound to happen.

 

http://www.toledoblade.com/Police-Fire/201...n-E-Toledo.html

 

While Mr. Watts was down the boys kicked him, over and over, shouting, "[Get] that white [man]. This is for Trayvon ... Trayvon lives, white [man]. Kill that white [man]," according to a police report.

[StrangeSox]

Justice.

[mr_genius]

[Soxbadger]

Did you not read the part where it said the guy who was attacked told them to "Remember Trayvon"? And thus the fact that they were yelling about it wasnt completely random, but it was actually because the victim made reference to it?

 

Lets say Im walking down the street and some guy says to me: "Remember Anne Frank"

 

If, I decide to assault and batter him over it, it is possible in my rage Im going to call him a Nazi and say this is for the Jews.

 

When I read your posts I wonder if you are playing Tarzan on Survivor, just pretending to be obtuse for the fun of it, or if you actually believe what you write.

 

I just can never decide.

[mr_genius]

Did you not read the part where it said the guy who was attacked told them to "Remember Trayvon"? And thus the fact that they were yelling about it wasnt completely random, but it was actually because the victim made reference to it?

 

Lets say Im walking down the street and some guy says to me: "Remember Anne Frank"

 

If, I decide to assault and batter him over it, it is possible in my rage Im going to call him a Nazi and say this is for the Jews.

 

When I read your posts I wonder if you are playing Tarzan on Survivor, just pretending to be obtuse for the fun of it, or if you actually believe what you write.

 

I just can never decide.

 

Your comparisons are ridiculous and you know it. Admit it, this propaganda and hysteria being put forth by the 'news' media is dangerous. There will more incidents to come. Unfortunately, this is probably just the beginning.

[StrangeSox]

White dude telling a couple of black kids "remember Trayvon" doesn't sound like the smartest idea in the world and could easily be interpreted as a threat. That's no excuse for them assaulting him, of course. Based entirely on his side of the story, it seems like they were going to mug him anyway and maybe the comment was taken the wrong way and made it more vicious.

 

But that guy looks like an 1840's malnourished prospector, so I'm on his side.

[mr_genius]

But that guy looks like an 1840's malnourished prospector

 

well, i can at least agree with that

[StrangeSox]

Plus he has three dachshunds! Adorable.

[caulfield12]

Imagine a white person being attacked in LA/South Central (Reginald Denny, for example) saying "Remember OJ!" or, on the opposite side "Remember Rodney King!" and the likely effect it would have.

 

Either way you interpret it, probably not the wisest move, and likely to inflame rather than defuse.

 

Maybe saying "What would Jesus do?" would be even wiser than a comment like that, lol.

 

Not sure you'd have the time while under assault to think of a pithy and clever retort, though, like we have the luxury of doing here on a message board.

[Soxbadger]

Okay first of all, anything can be dangerous. But, I strongly believe in the 1st Amendment, and the right of people to have opinions, regardless of how uninformed or stupid they may be. So, if you are at all suggesting that the news or media should censor themselves, I disagree. I disagree when it comes to both sides, Fox News can say their nonsense, MSNBC can say their nonsense, Al-Jazeera can say their nonsense.

 

So, if you want to censor all news, if you want to make society "safe" by not reporting or giving opinions on delicate issues, count me out.

 

I may not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it.

 

Now onto the facts of the actual article. This had nothing to do with news media or any hysteria put forth by the media. It simply is a case of misinterpretation.

 

The victim claims he said to remember Martin, because he the victim was identifying with Martin, and he wanted the attackers to think about themselves as a Zimmerman.

 

The attackers claim that the statement remember Martin was a threat by the victim, that if they didnt watch themselves, they would suffer the same fate as Martin.

 

The end result, people are likely going to get convicted for assault and battery.

 

But lets stop the "dangerous rhetoric" nonsense, sensationalism sells newspapers, thats the bottom line on both sides.

[Y2HH]

You're all just jumping the shark now.

 

Time to move on to more worthwhile conversations.

Edited April 5, 2012 by Y2HH

[mr_genius]

You're all just jumping the shark now.

 

Time to move on to more worthwhile conversations.

 

good point

[Balta1701]

The Post had a good, well done piece yesterday on other instances of Florida's "Stand your ground" law and how it has been used.

[Balta1701]

Grand jury panel called off.

The special prosecutor investigating the killing of Trayvon Martin has decided not to convene a grand jury in the case.

 

Now, the decision to file charges against George Zimmerman, 28, who told police he shot Martin, 17, in self-defense during an altercation in late February, will be totally in the hands of State Attorney Angela B. Corey.

 

...

"The decision should not be considered a factor in the final determination of the case," State Attorney Corey’s office said in a statement, according to CNN. The grand jury had been scheduled to convene on Tuesday. "At this time, the investigation continues and there will be no further comment from this office."

 

Natalie Jackson, an attorney for Martin's family, called the move is a hopeful sign that Zimmerman could soon be charged.

 

"I think it signals that an arrest could be forthcoming," said Jackson. "I don’t have any indication; that is just my opinion, but there is enough evidence in this case for an arrest, and a jury should be the one to decide his fate."

[Balta1701]

Ben Stiller, Vince Vaughan, and Jonah Hill summer movie titled "Neighborhood watch" now in serious jeopardy.

[Jenksismyhero]

Ben Stiller, Vince Vaughan, and Jonah Hill summer movie titled "Neighborhood watch" now in serious jeopardy.

 

Such an overreaction. I can't blame them, but that's pretty sad.