"STAND YOUR GROUND"--IS IT A GOOD LAW??

@Rockhead,

Rockhead wrote:

freedom to shoot people you are afraid of is not freedom.

That is not the law.
I 'd vote against that, if it were offered as a bill.

Rockhead wrote:

it's licensed bigotry.

Bigotry (not ME, bi Gott) is licensed by the Supreme Law of the Land:
everyone has an absolute right to hold whatever opinions he chooses,
with whatever degree of belief and of passion that he prefers
and he is free to stick to his guns, whether liberals like it or not.

David

0 Replies

@farmerman,

DAVID wrote:

Your definition of a "civilized country"
is one without justified homicide, one infers

farmerman wrote:

Why should a rising body count. no matter the circumstances, be something to celebrate??

Well, if the bad guys r getting killed (e.g., Travon Martin or John Errol Ferguson)
then we are safer for that fact.

Its a good thing, a happy event when retributive justice is executed.
I cheered when the Rosenbergs (in 1953) and when John Ferguson (now) were killed. HOORAY !!!

David

0 Replies

David/Farmerman

Ying/Yang

1 Reply

@DoctorGotz,

I guess that is true, Doctor.

David

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Good and timely topic that needs more discussion by everybody.
Unfortunately, the majority of people think it will never affect or harm them.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

You must have had your head shrunk by the same Bullshit Talk Show Host that has gotten to Daves head.
ACTUALLY you are the ones who wish to do away with the Constitution one step at a time. In many 's estimation, the SYG laws(where a killer gets a free pass by invoking a "I was being threatened" clause), are stomping on my FIRST AMENDMENT, FIFTH AMENDMENT< AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS by Misapplying the SECOND.

You will not be allowed to do away with our Constitution and destroy our freedom. Deal with it.

0 Replies

@parados,

parados wrote:

Ourtright LIES by oralloy..

You can't show anything that I am even wrong about, much less intentionally and maliciously wrong about.

parados wrote:

oralloy wrote:
That "unarmed kid" was possibly high on dissociative hallucinogens

FACT - based on the post mortem tox screen it is NOT possible that he was high on any hallucinogen.

Nope. There has been no evidence presented establishing that is a fact. We don't actually know whether the tox screen tested for Dextromethorphan.

Straightforward queries on that front have been met with nothing but hysteria and evasion.

Note also that Trayvon used dissociative hallucinogens. Plain ordinary hallucinogens are benign by comparison.

parados wrote:

oralloy wrote:
was carrying ingredients to brew even more dissociative hallucinogens,

Also a lie.

Nope. That's the truth. The truth isn't a lie, no matter how inconvenient you find it.

parados wrote:

Nothing Martin was carried could brew a hallucinogen.

Of the two things that he was carrying, both were key ingredients in the recipe that he used to make his dissociative hallucinogens more palatable.

Note also that Trayvon used dissociative hallucinogens. Plain ordinary hallucinogens are benign by comparison.

parados wrote:

FACT - Skittles and Iced Tea do not create any type of hallucinogen.

Trayvon was not carrying iced tea.

Skittles and AriZona Watermelon Flavored Fruit Drink (which are what he was actually carrying) were used by Trayvon to make his Dextromethorphan taste good.

parados wrote:

oralloy wrote:
No, not Meth. Meth is relatively sane compared to the "Poor Man's PCP" that Trayvon was brewing for himself.

There is no evidence that Trayvon was brewing this.

Sure there is. Trayvon made it quite clear from his online postings that he was into concoctions involving "Poor Man's PCP".

parados wrote:

Another LIE on your part.

Nope. That's the truth. The truth isn't a lie, no matter how inconvenient you find it.

parados wrote:

The TOX screen shows no such thing was in his system.

Your previous evasions have already made it clear that you have no idea whether he was tested for Dextromethorphan.

parados wrote:

oralloy wrote:
Trying to save his neighbors from being massacred by a drug addled thug is about the exact opposite of what a sociopath is.

Another Oralloy LIE.

You can't show anything that I am even wrong about, much less intentionally and maliciously wrong about.

parados wrote:

Martin was not about to massacre anyone and wasn't on drugs at the time of his death.

As previously noted, we don't really know if he was on drugs when he died.

And given his casing of houses and his preparations for brewing some seriously messed-up drugs, the massacre of an entire family was a realistic outcome if Trayvon had gone ahead with his plans for the evening.

parados wrote:

Zimmerman also never claimed that was his intent.

It is fairly safe to assume that when someone calls the police and reports someone acting like they are on drugs and casing houses, they are concerned about a drugged-up thug breaking into those houses.

parados wrote:

oralloy wrote:
Had Trayvon gotten all hopped up on Angel Dust and then broken into a house that happened to have a family at home at the time, the entire family probably would have been slaughtered.

This statement was after you explained that LEAN wasn't PCP.

You need to remember that "things that you imagine me saying" don't really count.

Only "things that I actually say" count.

parados wrote:

This statement was after you explained that LEAN wasn't PCP. Which was it oralloy? Was he on LEAN or PCP?

Lean is the mixture that Trayvon made by combining "Poor Man's PCP" with Skittles and AriZona Watermelon Flavored Fruit Drink.

Most people use Codeine instead, and tend to think that using "Poor Man's PCP" is completely nuts.

"Poor Man's PCP" (Dextromethorphan) is the active ingredient that Trayvon used in his Lean.

parados wrote:

Or are both your scenarios LIES that have no basis in reality?

As usual, I presented only one scenario, and it is the absolute truth.

parados wrote:

oralloy wrote:
I accused him of planning to get high on very dangerous drugs and then go break into other people's houses.

Another LIE

Nope. That's the truth. The truth isn't a lie, no matter how inconvenient you find it.

parados wrote:

there were no drugs on Martin.

He was carrying two of the major ingredients in the "Poor Man's PCP" recipe that he was known to use.

parados wrote:

oralloy wrote:
And I provided evidence that Trayvon was going to brew those Skittles into a concoction of "Poor Man's PCP".

Except that is ALSO a lie.

Nope. That's the truth. The truth isn't a lie, no matter how inconvenient you find it.

parados wrote:

You have provided no evidence of any DXM in Martin's possession. Without DXM there is no evidence he was going to brew any "Poor Man's PCP".

Sure there is. His history of brewing concoctions containing "Poor Man's PCP", and his carrying of major ingredients for the recipe he liked to brew, are such evidence.

parados wrote:

His texts from 8 months earlier are not evidence of him having DXM in his possession on that night.

They are when combined with the fact that he was carrying ingredients used in the concoctions that he was posting about.

parados wrote:

oralloy wrote:
No, I said he was going to get high on "Poor Man's PCP", using "Poor Man's PCP".

Yes, you did say that but after you said he was "possibly high".

No, I said it from the start.

parados wrote:

Denial on your part.

Nope. Just me telling the truth, like I always do.

parados wrote:

oralloy wrote:
Precursors?? He was not brewing Dextromethorphan. He was using Dextromethorphan that was already made.

And how exactly was he doing that when he had NO dxm?

Clearly he did have some.

parados wrote:

You seem to think your LIE somehow means there was dxm somewhere. Just lies by you, one after another and then more lies to try to support or deny your earlier lies.

You can't show anything that I am even wrong about, much less intentionally and maliciously wrong about.

2 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

The more I read, the more I believe that oralloy is some 14 year old precocious kid.

More ad hominem lies from you to cover up your refusal to address any facts.

farmerman wrote:

He has often drug up opinions but, where he loses it, is in the evidence.

Says the guy who refuses to address the evidence and who even was busted for concocting bogus claims.

farmerman wrote:

I said before, had oral been anywhere near a stand one behalf of Zimmerman, he would have been torn a new one and even been considered to have been suborning perjury on behalf of the defense.

Yes, you did say it. But it was nothing but bluster to cover up your refusal to address any facts.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

More ad hominem lies from you to cover up your refusal to address any facts.

When you start [resenting facts intead of fiction, I will respond in kind. Your "He must have been stoned" was funny enough.

Quote:

Says the guy who refuses to address the evidence and who even was busted for concocting bogus claims.

where are you presenting facts and of what was I "busted"?

Your "facts" are mere delusion. I have no idea what plane you stand upon but Im firmly on reality. Try it, youll like it.

Im not going to stand here and be caught up in another page turning insult fest. Ill let you get the last one in and then Ill just move on as if you don't exist.

You've avoided the entire "drug claim" even when presented with real facts. Forensics and all.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Seems that the Stand your Ground LAws may interfere with your 1st Amendment Rights in certain states.

That 's just foolishness; u get a D- on that, Professor.

farmerman wrote:

Most of the Anarchist Gun freaks don't really give a **** about anyone other than themselves

I am an ALMOST anarchist gunner; I liked reading your characterization,
in that I foster n promote selfishness and optimal Individualism,
but candor moves me to admit that I love my friends n family
and I rather like u and some of the A2K crowd.

David

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

Yes, but most of them hate our freedom and want to do away with the Constitution

farmerman wrote:

You must have had your head shrunk by the same Bullshit Talk Show Host that has gotten to Daves head.

Hay, Professor: I already TOLD u
that I am not much impressed by Rush.
(Note, incidentally, that he is only mild and weak in his support
of the right to KABA. He seldom brings it up on his show,
so far as I understand. If he were a better supporter, then I 'd be a better listener.)

What evidence do u have that I had different opinions,
or different knowledge of American history b4 I heard his show????
Please advise.

farmerman wrote:

ACTUALLY you are the ones who wish to do away with the Constitution one step at a time.

That has not occurred to me.
What evidence have u of this purported "wish" ??

farmerman wrote:

In many 's estimation,

HOW MANY????
What is the source of your data on this point ?

farmerman wrote:

the SYG laws(where a killer gets a free pass by invoking a "I was being threatened" clause),
are stomping on my FIRST AMENDMENT, FIFTH AMENDMENT< AND FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS by Misapplying the SECOND.

Really?? Constitutional Law was my favorite course, Professor!
Will u explain to us in full detail how the logic of your theory is manifested ??
I wanna hear THIS !!

David

1 Reply

Pass

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

well, itseemed that MArtins rights of
1peacable assembly

2due process

3civil rights

have been unilaterally terminated by murder,
Oralloy, in your camp, has been showing us how presumptions without evidence work. He's a good example of how you've all justified this event.(by lies and innuendo.

2 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

oralloy wrote:
More ad hominem lies from you to cover up your refusal to address any facts.

When you start presenting facts intead of fiction, I will respond in kind.

I've been presenting facts all along. And you clearly are either unwilling or unable to respond in kind.

farmerman wrote:

oralloy wrote:
Says the guy who refuses to address the evidence and who even was busted for concocting bogus claims.

where are you presenting facts

In every single reply I've made in this thread.

farmerman wrote:

and of what was I "busted"?

You were busted for fabricating lies about Dextromethorphan, in the post where you concocted your bogus claim about the tox screening.

farmerman wrote:

Your "facts" are mere delusion.

Nope. Just because you don't like what the facts are, that doesn't make them delusion.

farmerman wrote:

I have no idea what plane you stand upon but Im firmly on reality.

Maybe, but you are also hiding from that reality, and are spewing ad hominem lies about me to try to cover up your hiding.

farmerman wrote:

Try it, youll like it.

I do like it. And unlike you, I don't hide from it and then lie about others.

farmerman wrote:

Im not going to stand here and be caught up in another page turning insult fest. Ill let you get the last one in and then Ill just move on as if you don't exist.

If you stop spouting ad hominem lies about me to cover up your refusal to address facts, that would certainly be a big improvement. Go for it.

farmerman wrote:

You've avoided the entire "drug claim" even when presented with real facts. Forensics and all.

Your fabrications are in no way "real facts".

And no, I avoided nothing. I confronted your fabrication head on and exposed it for the falsehood that it is.

You of course then hid from that reality. But your hiding from it doesn't mean that I didn't do it.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

well, itseemed that MArtins rights of
1peacable assembly
2due process
3civil rights
have been unilaterally terminated by murder,

Self defense is not in any way murder. And repeating that nonsensical gibberish is not going to make it become true.

There is no way that "Trayvon violently assaulting people" could ever be counted as "peaceable assembly".

Due process refers to actions a government takes against people. Are you under the illusion that Mr. Zimmerman is a government?

Your civil rights claim combines the silliness of the first two. Civil rights are protection against government acts. And Trayvon did not have any right to go around violently assaulting people.

farmerman wrote:

Oralloy, in your camp, has been showing us how presumptions without evidence work. He's a good example of how you've all justified this event.(by lies and innuendo.

I thought you said you were going to stop spewing ad hominem lies about me to justify your refusal to address facts.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote:

Nope. There has been no evidence presented establishing that is a fact. We don't actually know whether the tox screen tested for Dextromethorphan.

Actually, we DO know they tested for it. You just don't want to admit it. The lab that did the testing lists the substances they test for.
http://www.nmslabs.com/services-forensic-toxicology/

Quote:

Note also that Trayvon used dissociative hallucinogens. Plain ordinary hallucinogens are benign by comparison.

So dissociative hallucinogens are not hallucinogens in your world? The lab tests for hallucinogens of all types. It also tests for "Dextro / Levo Methorphan".

oralloy wrote:

parados wrote:
oralloy wrote:
was carrying ingredients to brew even more dissociative hallucinogens,

Also a lie.

Nope. That's the truth. The truth isn't a lie, no matter how inconvenient you find it.

Another lie from you. Trayvon Martin was carrying NO hallucinogens of any kind according to the police report. Not dissociative hallucinogens. Not dxm of any kind. No Robitusen. Nothing that could be considered a drug of any kind. You can continue to repeat your lies but they are still lies. Until you show an official police document that lists something containing dxm that was found on Martin every time you claim he was carrying such an item you are simply repeating your lie. Every document I have seen lists no such items.

I find it interesting that you argue the lack of results finding dxm in his system proves a test wasn't conducted but the lack of dxm listed in the police documents somehow proves Martin was carrying that item.

Quote:

Sure there is. Trayvon made it quite clear from his online postings that he was into concoctions involving "Poor Man's PCP".

And that proves nothing about the night in question. Does your posting about guns 3 months ago prove you killed someone today? I don't think so, but you seem to think it would be proof.

Quote:

You can't show anything that I am even wrong about, much less intentionally and maliciously wrong about.

Actually, I can and did show you were maliciously wrong. Unless you want to argue that you are really that stupid that you don't know that tea and skittles are not a dissociative hallucinogen.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

Lean is the mixture that Trayvon made by combining "Poor Man's PCP" with Skittles and AriZona Watermelon Flavored Fruit Drink.

So... what ingredient did Martin NOT have that night?

Or are you actually arguing that Lean is composed of ONLY skittles and a flavored fruit drink?

You continue to lie oralloy and you continue to repeat the same lie over and over.

Martin did NOT have dxm on him that night. Since he did NOT have dxm he could not be making Poor Man's PCP. Any statement that he was intending to do that is a LIE because there is no evidence he had the ingredients to make it. Not only is it a lie on your part oralloy it is clearly a malicious lie. Malicous as in you are making an allegation when you have no evidence that Martin had dxm.

Now go ahead and repeat the lie when you have no evidence to support it. Texts from 9 months earlier are meaningless on that night oralloy. Your atttempt to use such texts only goes to show your lies are intentional and malicious. You are clearly and intentionally lying when you have no evidence to support your lie.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

I thought you said you were going to stop spewing ad hominem lies about me to justify your refusal to address facts.

And I thought that you told me that you would stop molesting children

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

I thought you said you were going to stop spewing ad hominem lies about me to justify your refusal to address facts.

And I thought that you told me that you would stop molesting children

2 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

oralloy wrote:
I thought you said you were going to stop spewing ad hominem lies about me to justify your refusal to address facts.

And I thought that you told me that you would stop molesting children

I see you were lying again.

1 Reply

"STAND YOUR GROUND"--IS IT A GOOD LAW??

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know