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

@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

Let the record show that Farmerman is highly dishonest. He lies about the facts, and he lies about people who tell the truth.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

if you were any more full of yourself, you would bust open and get **** on everyone within 50 feet of you...

0 Replies

@parados,

parados wrote:

oralloy wrote:
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/

I'll trust you on the claim that this is the lab that did the test, but to my knowledge this is the first time this link has been posted.

Absent time machines, it is unreasonable to act as if I knew about your link before you posted it.

Anyway, while their basic version of the test doesn't cover Dextromethorphan, it also doesn't cover a number of other prominent drugs either. And since they were testing for drugs, it is reasonable to presume that they chose one of the more expansive tests.

So I'll agree that Trayvon wasn't under the influence of dissociative hallucinogens when he assaulted Mr. Zimmerman.

parados wrote:

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

So dissociative hallucinogens are not hallucinogens in your world?

Not really. To me the word "hallucinogen" without the modifier "dissociative" would indicate the non-dissociative kind.

A regular hallucinogen makes everything look like a tie dye T-shirt or something, and you see lots of imaginary things that aren't really there. You also get your senses confused and blended with each other (or as Ozzy Osbourne once put it: "swallowing the colors of the sounds I hear").

A dissociative hallucinogen walls your conscious mind off from the rest of your brain. It makes you think you are standing outside your body controlling it by remote control. You also become convinced that you are not real, and the world is not real. And it prevents you from experiencing any pain.

The problem with dissociative hallucinogens comes from those last two. When people become convinced that the real world isn't actually real, sometimes they start engaging in some really messed-up criminal acts. And the inability to feel pain allows them to engage in levels of violence that seem almost superhuman.

The end result is police horror stories about unstoppable juggernauts that took a dozen shotgun blasts to the chest before they ended their rampage.

parados wrote:

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.

Nope. Trayvon was carrying two of the three ingredients for his recipe.

parados wrote:

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.

He was carrying the very two ingredients that he used to mix with his dissociative hallucinogens.

parados wrote:

You can continue to repeat your lies but they are still lies.

The truth isn't a lie, no matter how inconvenient it is.

parados wrote:

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.

Feel free to cite any instance of me saying Trayvon was carrying Dextromethorphan on him.

parados wrote:

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.

Feel free to try to cite any instance of me making either argument.

Remember, "arguments that you only imagine me saying" don't count.

Only "arguments that I actually make" count.

parados wrote:

oralloy wrote:
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.

Sure it does. It shows that Trayvon was into taking "Poor Man's PCP" mixed in certain concoctions.

And it is only one element of the evidence. There is also the fact that Trayvon was carrying ingredients for the very concoction that he was posting about.

parados wrote:

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.

Going from "having a gun" to "killing someone" is a bit of a leap.

But if I once posted about owning a certain type of gun, and there was then proof that on one night I was carrying ammo for that type of gun, it might be enough to justify a post on a messageboard concluding that I was carrying that gun on that night.

parados wrote:

oralloy wrote:
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.

You haven't even showed that I am wrong, much less intentionally or maliciously so.

But your link to the lab was useful. I'll agree Trayvon was not on Dextromethorphan when he assaulted Mr. Zimmerman.

parados wrote:

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.

It isn't that they are a dissociative hallucinogen. It is that Trayvon habitually mixed Skittles and AriZona Watermelon Flavored Fruit Drink with his dissociative hallucinogen.

1 Reply

@parados,

parados wrote:

oralloy wrote:
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?

It looks to me like he had access to all three ingredients.

parados wrote:

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

No. It also requires a certain kind of cough syrup added to the mix.

parados wrote:

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

Nope. What I do is post the truth. The truth isn't a lie, no matter how inconvenient it is.

parados wrote:

Martin did NOT have dxm on him that night. Since he did NOT have dxm he could not be making Poor Man's PCP.

Clarification: Dextromethorphan = Poor Man's PCP.

Trayvon was mixing up concoctions that contained "Poor Man's PCP", not making "Poor Man's PCP" itself.

Anyway, the fact that he was not carrying it on him right when he assaulted Mr. Zimmerman does not mean he didn't have any.

parados wrote:

Any statement that he was intending to do that is a LIE because there is no evidence he had the ingredients to make it.

Nonsense. Of the two items he was carrying, both were specific ingredients in his recipe.

parados wrote:

Not only is it a lie on your part oralloy it is clearly a malicious lie.

No, the truth isn't a lie, no matter how inconvenient it is.

parados wrote:

Malicous as in you are making an allegation when you have no evidence that Martin had dxm.

I have evidence that he was carrying the other two ingredients in his recipe however.

parados wrote:

Now go ahead and repeat the lie when you have no evidence to support it.

The truth isn't a lie, no matter how inconvenient it is.

parados wrote:

Texts from 9 months earlier are meaningless on that night oralloy.

Wrong. Those posts show that Trayvon was into brewing and consuming the concoction that he was carrying specific ingredients for when he assaulted Mr. Zimmerman.

parados wrote:

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.

The truth isn't a lie, no matter how inconvenient it is.

3 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

well, itseemed that MArtins rights of
1peacable assembly

Assembly with WHOM??
Did the noble Zimmy command Martin to ostracize someone??

farmerman wrote:

2due process

Martin's rights were in a state of waiver
from the time that Martin became violent,
until he stopped his violence.
If u dispute that, then please demonstrate your point
by citation to some statutory or judicial authority
supporting the proposition that a malefactor's rights
continue intact during his practice of un-provoked brutality upon a citizen.

farmerman wrote:

3civil rights

Rights to do WHAT??
Will u be less vague and more specific so as to render your meaning understandable??

farmerman wrote:

have been unilaterally terminated by murder,

What murder is that, farmer?? I know of no murder.

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 dunno what, in particular, u mean.
He is usually a pretty good logician so far as I have observed.

The left EMBARRASSED itself in that Travon fiasco.

David

1 Reply

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

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

That will never happen.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote:

Let the record show that Farmerman is highly dishonest. He lies about the facts, and he lies about people who tell the truth.

You are a lying SOS who defaults to insult immediately upon being challeneged. If you cant handle it, drop away.
You've made assertions with no real facts, (merly some made up assertions)> WHERE ARE YOUR FACTS about the drug addled Martin?

You've conveniently gone back to fact-free insult when you couldn't handle the challenges.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

youre being obtuse again. The challenge of Zimmermans second amendment rights had trumped all of MArtins other rights.

2 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

You are a lying SOS who defaults to insult immediately upon being challeneged. If you cant handle it, drop away.
You've made assertions with no real facts, (merly some made up assertions)> WHERE ARE YOUR FACTS about the drug addled Martin?
You've conveniently gone back to fact-free insult when you couldn't handle the challenges.

Let the record show that the only person here who is engaging in lies is farmerman.

Let the record show that the only person here who is engaging in insults is farmerman.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

youre being obtuse again.

No, he is telling the truth, just like he always does.

farmerman wrote:

The challenge of Zimmermans second amendment rights had trumped all of MArtins other rights.

Trayvon did not have any right to go around assaulting people.

0 Replies

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

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.

OK, I guess we can accept you didn't lie and say you would stop molesting children.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

Absent time machines, it is unreasonable to act as if I knew about your link before you posted it.

No time machine was involved. I only had to look at the facts in the case. The lab is listed in the autopsy report. Your failure to make a claim without doing even basic research points to your statement being a malicious lie. The fact that you didn't bother to check it out and required that others disprove it shows it was intentional and malicious.

Quote:

The end result is police horror stories about unstoppable juggernauts that took a dozen shotgun blasts to the chest before they ended their rampage.

Which is nothing but a continuation of your malicious lie. Why do you bring this up since Trayvon clearly wasn't on any hallucinogen, dissociative or other? The only reason seems to be you are attempting to maliciously continue with your innuendo about Martin being on drugs.

Quote:

Nope. Trayvon was carrying two of the three ingredients for his recipe.

No, he wasn't. First of all you have NO recipe from Trayvon. This is just another one of your malicious lies. Second the 2 items do not in any way create a drug. They could only be used as flavoring to make a drug more palatable. That is hardly the ingredients of a recipe for a drug any more than red #5 is a part of the recipe for Codeine cough syrup. You are intentionally and maliciously lying about what is required to make Poor Man's PCP. If we were to actually believe your argument then every pharmacy and convenience store in the US sells Poor Man's PCP to minors when they sell them sugary drinks and candy. Not even you can believe that lie.

Quote:

Sure it does. It shows that Trayvon was into taking "Poor Man's PCP" mixed in certain concoctions.

Really? What specific concentration does it show? I am just curious because I know you posted the texts and there is nothing in those texts about any concentrations. What part sugary drink to what part dxm does Trayvon say he is mixing? This is just another demonstrable lie on your part. We can only conclude it is malicious and intentional since we know you have posted the texts and probably read them.

Quote:

Feel free to cite any instance of me saying Trayvon was carrying Dextromethorphan on him.

Since you admit that Trayvon had no dxm then how was he going to make the Poor Man's PCP you claimed he was making? You can't make it without dxm. This points out the lie and points to knowing it was a lie. This would again mean your lie was intentional and malicious.

Tell us Oralloy, how was Martin going to make Poor Man's PCP without dxm? Until you can cite exactly where the dxm was any argument that he was intending to do that is lie on your part.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

It looks to me like he had access to all three ingredients.

Really? And where was the third ingredient? I would like facts not speculation on your part.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote:

Anyway, the fact that he was not carrying it on him right when he assaulted Mr. Zimmerman does not mean he didn't have any.

There is your malicious and intentional lie right there oralloy. The fact that he didn't have any IS evidence that he didn't have any no matter what you try to argue.

Quote:

No, the truth isn't a lie, no matter how inconvenient it is.

The truth is you have no evidence of any dxm anywhere. THat makes your claims a lie. The fact that you know he had none on him makes your lies intentional and malicious.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Quote:

I have evidence that he was carrying the other two ingredients in his recipe however.

Please post Martin's recipe and a reference to where it can be found in his words. Not someone else's recipe because you clearly state you have "his recipe."

2 Replies

@parados,

Quote:

I have evidence that he was carrying the other two ingredients in his recipe however.

parados wrote:

Please post Martin's recipe and a reference to where it can be found in his words.
Not someone else's recipe because you clearly state you have "his recipe."

Note that his recipe need not have ORIGINATED from him. Do u own a car?
Did u invent it?? Is it YOUR property ?

David

0 Replies

@parados,

Quote:

It looks to me like he had access to all three ingredients.

parados wrote:

Really? And where was the third ingredient?
I would like facts not speculation on your part.

Had he acquired it yet??

1 Reply

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

youre being obtuse again.

I am pointing out flaws in your position,
and I am trying to do so concisely WITHOUT writing long essays in demonstration of your errors.

farmerman wrote:

The challenge of Zimmermans second amendment rights had trumped all of MArtins other rights.

He did not
have a right to NOT be followed. No one has that right,
except those few who have judicial anti-stawking injunctions.

It is a very fine idea to LOOK AT burglars and suspected burglars,
to deny them the privacy that thay crave for their work.

David

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

parados wrote:
oralloy wrote:
It looks to me like he had access to all three ingredients.

Really? And where was the third ingredient? I would like facts not speculation on your part.

Had he acquired it yet??

Likely he had, and then stashed it somewhere until he had acquired the other ingredients (and cased some houses to then break into once he had consumed the drugs).

0 Replies

@parados,

parados wrote:

OK, I guess we can accept you didn't lie and say you would stop molesting children.

I realize that you have no facts on your side and the law is against you as well. But really, that is no reason for you to join in with farmerman's dishonesty and name-calling.

1 Reply

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

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know