Re: Unarmed teen shooting: the debate trickles on...

Post Reply
Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Re: Unarmed teen shooting: the debate trickles on...

Post by Coito ergo sum » Wed Dec 05, 2012 1:35 pm

I sympathize with the guy who asked the kids to turn their "music" down. It annoys the fuck out of me to have to sit there at a light while some jackass has to blast his "sub-woofers" at top volume so everyone else has to suffer through it. Usually, these are $2,000 stereo systems in a $1,500 car.

...that's almost as bad as when people make you listen to some "meaningful" song the picked out to play for you instead of the standard ringing telephone when you call them on their cell phone. Excuse me, but I don't need to hear, like, Say What You Need to Say every time I call! Douches.

User avatar
Tyrannical
Posts: 6468
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 4:59 am
Contact:

Re: Re: Unarmed teen shooting: the debate trickles on...

Post by Tyrannical » Wed Dec 05, 2012 2:27 pm

Coito ergo sum wrote:
The White Guy is in jail, and up on murder charges. Unless the kid in the car pulled a gun on him first, he's going down.
I believe Whitey's story is that the deceased pulled a shotgun on him first, and the shotgun was later disposed of by his friends in the car.
Unless Whitey was craaaaaaazy, odds are he was telling the truth.
A rational skeptic should be able to discuss and debate anything, no matter how much they may personally disagree with that point of view. Discussing a subject is not agreeing with it, but understanding it.

Coito ergo sum
Posts: 32040
Joined: Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Re: Unarmed teen shooting: the debate trickles on...

Post by Coito ergo sum » Wed Dec 05, 2012 2:34 pm

Tyrannical wrote:
Coito ergo sum wrote:
The White Guy is in jail, and up on murder charges. Unless the kid in the car pulled a gun on him first, he's going down.
I believe Whitey's story is that the deceased pulled a shotgun on him first, and the shotgun was later disposed of by his friends in the car.
Unless Whitey was craaaaaaazy, odds are he was telling the truth.
But, but...how dare he ask someone to turn their music down...that's fabricating a confrontation!

Seth
GrandMaster Zen Troll
Posts: 22077
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:02 am
Contact:

Re: Unarmed teen shooting: the debate trickles on...

Post by Seth » Wed Dec 05, 2012 8:24 pm

Tero wrote:Nice mugshot of idiot who could not stay inside his car.
He was not required by the law to stay inside his car, but Martin was required by law not to attack and try to kill him.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S

"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke

"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth

© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.

Seth
GrandMaster Zen Troll
Posts: 22077
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:02 am
Contact:

Re: Unarmed teen shooting: the debate trickles on...

Post by Seth » Wed Dec 05, 2012 8:26 pm

amused wrote:
Coito ergo sum wrote:
Tero wrote:Nice mugshot of idiot who could not stay inside his car.
In all fairness, he did have as much right to be outside of his vehicle as anyone else, didn't he?
Yes, but he did not have the right to fabricate a violent confrontation in order to justify murder.
The evidence indicates that it was Martin that "fabricated" a violent confrontation leading to his own death at the hands of his victim. That's what happens sometimes when you violently attack someone for no reason.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S

"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke

"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth

© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.

Seth
GrandMaster Zen Troll
Posts: 22077
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:02 am
Contact:

Re: Unarmed teen shooting: the debate trickles on...

Post by Seth » Wed Dec 05, 2012 8:27 pm

amused wrote:
Coito ergo sum wrote:
amused wrote:
Coito ergo sum wrote:
Tero wrote:Nice mugshot of idiot who could not stay inside his car.
In all fairness, he did have as much right to be outside of his vehicle as anyone else, didn't he?
Yes, but he did not have the right to fabricate a violent confrontation in order to justify murder.
...and, the proof he did that is.....?

It would seem to me that unless Zimmerman initiated the physical confrontation, there would be no justification for Martin to get physical. Simply asking Martin what he was doing in the neighborhood is not "fabricating a violent confrontation," even if Zimmerman was being a dick about it.
Yes it is.
No, it's not. The First Amendment guarantees Zimmerman's right to ask Martin anything he wants in a public place, and especially in a PRIVATE place like Zimmerman's gated, private community. It does not compel Martin to answer, but asking does not justify a violent attack.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S

"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke

"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth

© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.

User avatar
Tero
Just saying
Posts: 51685
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:50 pm
About me: 8-34-20
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Unarmed teen shooting: the debate trickles on...

Post by Tero » Wed Dec 05, 2012 9:20 pm

Still an idiot. Drive up to black dude, ask him what he was doing there. Through the window. Black dude breaks into house? Call 911.

Wave gun from car, if it gives him more courage. If not, the 911.

Now you are going to say idiots have the right to guns. Just the reason I stay out of trailer parks.

Seth
GrandMaster Zen Troll
Posts: 22077
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:02 am
Contact:

Re: Unarmed teen shooting: the debate trickles on...

Post by Seth » Wed Dec 05, 2012 9:49 pm

Tero wrote:Still an idiot. Drive up to black dude, ask him what he was doing there. Through the window. Black dude breaks into house? Call 911.

Wave gun from car, if it gives him more courage. If not, the 911.
He did call 911. He was on the phone with 911 directing officers to his location when he was attacked by Martin.
Now you are going to say idiots have the right to guns. Just the reason I stay out of trailer parks.
As if that will help protect you. :funny:

He survived, his attacker did not, therefore, ipso facto, he did exactly what he needed to do and is not, therefore, an idiot.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S

"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke

"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth

© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.

User avatar
amused
amused
Posts: 3873
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 11:04 pm
About me: Reinvention phase initiated
Contact:

Re: Re: Unarmed teen shooting: the debate trickles on...

Post by amused » Wed Dec 05, 2012 10:01 pm

Zimmerman armed himself with intent to kill, fabricated a confrontation, and murdered Trayvon Martin. That is what happened, the facts speak for themselves. I just wish the Martin family could pump Zimmerman full of lead, it's what he deserves.

Seth
GrandMaster Zen Troll
Posts: 22077
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:02 am
Contact:

Re: Re: Unarmed teen shooting: the debate trickles on...

Post by Seth » Wed Dec 05, 2012 10:06 pm

amused wrote:Zimmerman armed himself with intent to kill, fabricated a confrontation, and murdered Trayvon Martin. That is what happened, the facts speak for themselves.
You don't know what the facts are and aren't qualified to pass judgment on them even if you did. Zimmerman armed himself with the intent to protect himself as the law allows in the event he is violently attacked, which he was.
I just wish the Martin family could pump Zimmerman full of lead, it's what he deserves.
I'm sure someone's thinking the same thing about you. What are YOU going to do about that?
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S

"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke

"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth

© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.

User avatar
Tero
Just saying
Posts: 51685
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 9:50 pm
About me: 8-34-20
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Unarmed teen shooting: the debate trickles on...

Post by Tero » Thu Dec 06, 2012 1:58 am

Seth wrote:
He survived, his attacker did not, therefore, ipso facto, he did exactly what he needed to do and is not, therefore, an idiot.
A volunteer? An idiot. We pay cops to deal with these things in urban situations. Call 911 and sit in the car next time, Z.

User avatar
amused
amused
Posts: 3873
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2010 11:04 pm
About me: Reinvention phase initiated
Contact:

Re: Re: Unarmed teen shooting: the debate trickles on...

Post by amused » Thu Dec 06, 2012 1:02 pm

The NRA and gun nuts everywhere have Martin's blood on their hands. Shame on them all for spreading a culture of hate and fear.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Stabsobermaschinist
Posts: 151265
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:24 am
About me: My posts are related to the thread in the same way Gliese 651b is related to your mother's underwear drawer.
Location: Sitting next to Ayaan in Domus Draconis, and communicating via PMs.
Contact:

Re: Re: Unarmed teen shooting: the debate trickles on...

Post by Gawdzilla Sama » Thu Dec 06, 2012 5:38 pm

We need a gun nut smiley.
Image
Ein Ubootsoldat wrote:“Ich melde mich ab. Grüssen Sie bitte meine Kameraden.”

Seth
GrandMaster Zen Troll
Posts: 22077
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:02 am
Contact:

Re: Unarmed teen shooting: the debate trickles on...

Post by Seth » Thu Dec 06, 2012 6:41 pm

Tero wrote:
Seth wrote:
He survived, his attacker did not, therefore, ipso facto, he did exactly what he needed to do and is not, therefore, an idiot.
A volunteer? An idiot. We pay cops to deal with these things in urban situations. Call 911 and sit in the car next time, Z.
As a retired cop, I'm here to tell you that no, you do not. The police are inherently a reactive organization that almost always responds well after the crime has occurred. That's by design. Few people in the US would want to live under the kind of ubiquitous and oppressive police-state tactics that would be required to have a cop on every corner prepared to respond instantly to any potential crime.

Sir Robert Peel, the architect of modern policing worldwide and the founder of the London Metropolitan Police, expounded on this in his Nine Principles:
  • The basic mission for which the police exist is to prevent crime and disorder.

    The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon the public approval of police actions.

    Police must secure the willing co-operation of the public in voluntary observation of the law to be able to secure and maintain the respect of the public.

    The degree of co-operation of the public that can be secured diminishes proportionately to the necessity of the use of physical force.

    Police seek and preserve public favour not by catering to public opinion, but by constantly demonstrating absolute impartial service to the law.

    Police use physical force to the extent necessary to secure observance of the law or to restore order only when the exercise of persuasion, advice, and warning is found to be insufficient.

    Police, at all times, should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties which are incumbent upon every citizen in the interests of community welfare and existence.

    Police should always direct their action strictly towards their functions, and never appear to usurp the powers of the judiciary.

    The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with it.
The simple fact is that the authority wielded by the police is derived directly, and only from the authority vested in each and every member of society, which authority each and every individual is fully authorized to exercise on his or her own at need. The grant of power to the government is not an abdication of the right to enforce the law on the part of the individual, it is a co-equal grant of authority for the police to exercise those rights and powers that are inherent in each individual.

There is, in most states, little or no difference between the authority a police officer has to arrest a person and that which a citizen has to do the same, including the right to use reasonable and appropriate physical force to effect an arrest. In Colorado, for example, a person not a "Peace Officer" may arrest any person for any "offense" committed in his or her presence. An "offense" is defined as any act which violates a state law for which a fine and/or imprisonment is the punishment, which includes felonies, misdemeanors and petty offenses as defined by state law. One may not, however, arrest a person for a violation of a municipal or country ordinance not defined as a state offense.

The primary difference between the authority a police officer has been granted and that of a citizen is that the police have been granted an additional authority to arrest a person based not upon observed criminality but based upon evidence that rises to the level of probable cause.

But the actual role of the police is primarily to be a deterrent to crime by their presence in the community and a reactive investigatory branch of government that tracks down and arrests criminals AFTER they have committed a crime.

The police have neither a mandate nor a legal obligation to protect any individual citizen against any particular crime at any time. Their duty is general in nature, not specific, and the Supreme Court has ruled several times that police officers are under NO legal obligation to act to defend or save a particular individual who is in danger or is the victim of a crime.

The duty, if one exists, to protect the individual against criminal activity lies with THAT INDIVIDUAL, and the authority to act in self defense, or defense of the community when faced with criminality, is vested in each and every individual, not just in the police.

Therefore it is up to each individual how much or little they wish to be involved in "community policing" or a decision to intervene on behalf of others who are being victimized by criminals.

The police are almost never present when criminal attack happens, and they are not intended to be present by design, so the authority to respond to a criminal event lies first and foremost with the victim, secondarily with other citizens who can and wish to respond, and only finally with the police.

Ask any police officer who actually knows his job and the limits of his authority and he will tell you it's not his job to protect you, it's yours.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S

"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke

"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth

© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.

Seth
GrandMaster Zen Troll
Posts: 22077
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 1:02 am
Contact:

Re: Re: Unarmed teen shooting: the debate trickles on...

Post by Seth » Thu Dec 06, 2012 6:44 pm

amused wrote:The NRA and gun nuts everywhere have Martin's blood on their hands. Shame on them all for spreading a culture of hate and fear.
Meh. :bored: :blah:

The NRA and gun owners everywhere have every right to keep and bear their arms for their personal defense and defense of the nation at need, and neither "spread a culture of hate and fear," that's the province of mindless hoplophobes and moral cowards who expect SOMEONE ELSE to place themselves in danger in order to protect them from criminality.

Martin got what he deserved.
"Seth is Grandmaster Zen Troll who trains his victims to troll themselves every time they think of him" Robert_S

"All that is required for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke

"Those who support denying anyone the right to keep and bear arms for personal defense are fully complicit in every crime that might have been prevented had the victim been effectively armed." Seth

© 2013/2014/2015/2016 Seth, all rights reserved. No reuse, republication, duplication, or derivative work is authorized.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests