Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Gun Control

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Kalalau
    replied
    Re: Gun Control

    Zimmerman in trouble again, another speeding ticket and his marriage seems to be breaking up. I got a speeding ticket in 1972 for doing 41 in a 25 zone, they had me on radar so how could I deny it? Later that year radar scopes were shown to be giving defective readings, other than that bogus ticket, no tickets. Do you get speeding tickets every couple of weeks? Seems like a kinda irresponsible guy. Sort of taking the law into his own hands or just ignoring it at his convenience. Then those reports that he'd been in trouble for violence before he murdered Trayvon Martin. The ultimate violence, but that was fine with the white jury. Seems like Zimmerman is a loose cannon. One can't help but wonder where life will take him. Wondering if details of his divorce become public if that will show a history of domestic violence. No wonder the Fla. police rejected him. Too bad the jury didn't. But after all, they were white. Except for the one hispanic lady who later admitted she made a mistake.

    There was some crazy story out of Florida about another Stand Yo Ground killing. A pre emptive killing. Doesn't meet the technical requirements of the law for getting away with murder but maybe he'll get a white jury. Just assuming.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kalalau
    replied
    Re: Gun Control

    There have been a couple of horrible cases recently; the Australian student in the US shot and killed for entertainment by 2 Black kids and a white kid, and another Black on white fun shooting somewhere else. Its a little hard to keep track of em all, sorry. Anyway, I think the Zimmerman verdict sent a really bad message. it said killing people is OK. It couldn't possibly have been any clearer. Is that a message you really want going out from your courts? Maybe if those kids had seen justice, at least SOME justice, exacted against Zimmerman they would have understood that killing people is NOT OK, and that it will be punished. Maybe they even had some kind of vengeance in mind. It was so much like the not guilty verdicts against the 4 LA cops who beat the crap out of Rodney King: we are white, we can get away with it, its OK because we are white. Even if some white people are prejudiced, we need to accept that all of us live in this country and it is much better to have us pee outside of the tent than on one another inside.

    Leave a comment:


  • matapule
    replied
    Re: Gun Control

    Originally posted by Kalalau View Post
    The Zimmerman case would have been a nothing if Zimmerman had shot Martin with a sedative dart.
    It s now revealed that Zimmerman apparently had a fight with his wife the day that Trayvon was killed. She wasn't even at home that night. She had retreated to her parents house. This would certainly go to Zimmerman's state of mind that night.

    It appears that Zimmerman and his wife are now separated and she refuses to deny that a divorce is possible. Zimmerman has a history of sexually abusing women and physical assault on both men and women. He is an ongoing threat to society and he is now armed with guns again.

    STRICT GUN CONTROL NOW!

    Leave a comment:


  • Kalalau
    replied
    Re: Gun Control

    That is a seriously superb idea! Gunshots are not that easy to recover from, but electrical shock (mild) or sedative darts would be a ton less serious medically. The Zimmerman case would have been a nothing if Zimmerman had shot Martin with a sedative dart. A seriously excellent idea. Ramp down deadliness as much as possible across the board.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kaonohi
    replied
    Re: Gun Control

    Originally posted by Kalalau View Post
    Wow, just too precious!

    gawker.com/lawmaker-leading-call-for-arming-teachers-accidentally-1216609648
    Instead of deadly force, there are weapons that shoot darts connected to wires to give an electric shock that disables an opponent.

    NON-LETHAL!

    Leave a comment:


  • Kalalau
    replied
    Re: Gun Control

    Wow, just too precious!

    gawker.com/lawmaker-leading-call-for-arming-teachers-accidentally-1216609648

    Leave a comment:


  • Kalalau
    replied
    Re: Gun Control

    Notes From All Over...

    http://cleveland.cbslocal.com/2013/0...-safety-class/


    And behold, AG Holder is advocating moderating the War On Drugs. Really, America Land Of The Free should not have 2.5 million people behind bars, more than China or Russia, known dictatorships. Especially since drugs are usually a victimless crime. And even if drugs absolutely must be punished, some public service weekends or at most a couple of weeks in jail would seem sufficient. The last thing we need is a profit driven prison industry lobbying for harsher & harsher laws to roll up their profits. So he will be called soft on crime. Coddling drug lords.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kalalau
    replied
    Re: Gun Control

    It would also help a LOT if the War On Drugs were moderated. Laws of supply & demand = gigantic amounts of money at stake, it produces violence in Mexico and it certainly produced violence in Fla during the cocaine years. Given the laws, given the economics, what could you possibly expect but that drug dealers would arm themselves as heavily as possible. This all happened before, during Prohibition. But the only thing we learn from history is that we don't learn from history.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ron Whitfield
    replied
    Re: Gun Control

    Originally posted by matapule View Post
    Yep, arming 16 year olds will certainly bring the murder rate down!

    Yep, like Florida doesn't have enough guns already. The SYG law certainly prevented Florida's "horrific case" yesterday Gun Nut!
    It'll certainly drive the seriousness of the situation home and eventually the murder rate will come down.

    Who in the crowd that was hit or nearby had a gun to thwart or return fire for protection/defense/offense? None? Too bad for them, I'll bet they wish it'd been different now, don't you?

    GUN NUTS NEED PROTECTION TOO, NOW!

    Leave a comment:


  • matapule
    replied
    Re: Gun Control

    Originally posted by Ron Whitfield View Post
    The law was enacted because Florida was becoming the assault/murder capital of the Nation and a few horrific cases tipped the scales.
    But that's like years ago when they went wholesale stupid about barring incoming calls to a pay phone because a few were using them for drug deals.

    Now, if Trayvon had been carrying and able to even the playing field a bit more against his armed stalker he'd probably be alive today.
    Yep, arming 16 year olds will certainly bring the murder rate down!

    GUNS FOR ALL, NOW!
    Yep, like Florida doesn't have enough guns already. The SYG law certainly prevented Florida's "horrific case" yesterday Gun Nut!

    STRICT GUN CONTROL NOW!

    Leave a comment:


  • Ron Whitfield
    replied
    Re: Gun Control

    Originally posted by matapule View Post
    With the way the laws are written in Florida they have to take his word for it since anyone who could contradict his story is now dead.
    The law was enacted because Florida was becoming the assault/murder capital of the Nation and a few horrific cases tipped the scales.
    Now, if Trayvon had been carrying and able to even the playing field a bit more against his armed stalker he'd probably be alive today.

    GUNS FOR ALL, NOW!

    Leave a comment:


  • matapule
    replied
    Re: Gun Control

    Originally posted by Kalalau View Post
    6 shot in Florida hostage standoff. The killer should have claimed self defense.
    Obviously, there are not enough guns in Florida, otherwise this sort of thing wouldn't happen there. The shooter was just "standing his ground." The shooter should have just surrendered to the police and claimed he was being "threatened" by the six people he shot. With the way the laws are written in Florida they have to take his word for it since anyone who could contradict his story is now dead. What a brain dead State. The governor and a majority of the State legislators are a bunch of gun nuts.

    STRICT GUN CONTROL NOW!

    Leave a comment:


  • Kalalau
    replied
    Re: Gun Control

    6 shot in Florida hostage standoff. The killer should have claimed self defense.

    Leave a comment:


  • Kalalau
    replied
    Re: Gun Control

    In an interview with ABC Juror B 29 in the Zimmerman trial admits Zimmerman "got away with murder". She said that under the law and the jury instructions it was impossible to find Zimmerman guilty. We are often told this is a society of laws, not men, like thats something good. Given that the laws are good, its fine. But everything that happened under the Nazis was legal under their legal system, everything that happened in the USSR was legal under its laws, and now we have Florida and other states blessing murder if the t's are crossed and the i's dotted. She said she feels guilty, can't sleep at night, or eat. I wouldn't feel good either, setting a murderer loose. But then, I would not set a murderer loose for any reason including that the victim was a Black teenager.

    Leave a comment:


  • MyopicJoe
    replied
    Re: Gun Control

    One self defense lawyer's opinion of why "stand your ground" didn't apply to Marissa Alexander:

    Here, if we consider the facts in a manner most favorable to Alexander, there was an initial physical, non-deadly conflict with her husband. Perhaps we can even assume that her husband was the aggressor in that conflict. In that case he may well bear legal liability for that non-deadly fight.

    Alexander, however, took things to another level when she retrieved her firearm (MJ: she leaves her husband, goes to the garage, and returns). She escalated a non-deadly confrontation to a deadly confrontation. In the eyes of the law this is effectively a second, separate fight, one in which Alexander was the aggressor.

    And how does being the aggressor affect one’s right to “stand-your-ground”? It obliterates it. Florida’s “stand-your-ground” provision, 776.013(3), applies ONLY to “[a] person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked . . . ”


    Here Alexander WAS engaged in criminal activity–she initiated a deadly force confrontation–and it was not she who was attacked but she who was doing the attacking. The Court tossing out stand-your-ground in this Florida case was not even a tough call, as “stand-your-ground” was inapplicable on its face.
    At some point Alexander walked past Gray and the children into the garage, where she obtained a gun. She then fired the gun at, or in the direction of, Gray and the two children.
    Yeah, her husband hit her in the past, but at that specific moment he didn't. The law's a tricky thing. The court doesn't care what you think the law means. Ignorance is no defense, especially when it comes to self defense.


    Read "In the Gravest Extreme" by Massad Ayoob


    A more modern read is "The Law of Self Defense" by Andrew Branca, though I haven't read that one myself.
    Last edited by MyopicJoe; July 25, 2013, 12:40 AM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X