27
   

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

 
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Fri 9 Aug, 2013 04:19 am
@parados,
parados wrote:
oralloy wrote:
It looks to me like he had access to all three ingredients.

Really? And where was the third ingredient?

No idea.


parados wrote:
I would like facts not speculation on your part.

Well, you've come to the right place if you're looking for someone who will stick to the facts and not speculate.

But unfortunately I do not know where Trayvon stashed his drugs.
oralloy
 
  -2  
Fri 9 Aug, 2013 04:20 am
@parados,
parados wrote:
oralloy wrote:
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.

No, my statement was the truth, and therefore not a falsehood, much less an intentional and malicious falsehood.


parados wrote:
The fact that he didn't have any IS evidence that he didn't have any no matter what you try to argue.

No. The fact that he didn't have any on him is not evidence that he didn't have any.


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

The truth is you have no evidence of any dxm anywhere.

True. But I have evidence that he was acquiring the other ingredients in his recipe.


parados wrote:
That makes your claims a lie.

Nonsense.


parados wrote:
The fact that you know he had none on him makes your lies intentional and malicious.

You seem a bit confused about what a lie is.

Lies are intentional and malicious by definition. If a falsehood is not intentional and malicious, then it is not a lie.

That said, the fact that my statements are completely true means that there is no falsehood or lie in anything I say.
oralloy
 
  -2  
Fri 9 Aug, 2013 04:22 am
@parados,
parados wrote:
oralloy wrote:
Absent time machines, it is unreasonable to act as if I knew about your link before you posted it.

No time machine was involved.

Indeed. Thus the unreasonableness of acting as if I knew of your link before you posted it.


parados wrote:
Your failure to make a claim without doing even basic research points to your statement being a malicious lie.

The fact that I refuse to make a claim when I do not know the truth shows that I have considerable honor and integrity.


parados wrote:
The fact that you didn't bother to check it out and required that others disprove it shows it was intentional and malicious.

I did not require anyone to disprove anything.

To ascribe malice to "me wondering if Trayvon was screened for Dextromethorphan" is silly.

The fact that I didn't check it out myself shows that I did not regard the answer to the question as being particularly important.


parados wrote:
oralloy wrote:
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.

I doubt you can find any inaccuracies in my description of the difference between hallucinogens and dissociative hallucinogens, much less show that the (nonexistent) inaccuracies were malicious or intentional.


parados wrote:
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.

I brought up the difference because you asked.

Your exact words:
"So dissociative hallucinogens are not hallucinogens in your world?"


parados wrote:
oralloy wrote:
Nope. Trayvon was carrying two of the three ingredients for his recipe.

No, he wasn't.

Wrong. Skittles and AriZona Watermelon Flavored Fruit Drink were two of the ingredients in his recipe.


parados wrote:
First of all you have NO recipe from Trayvon.

I don't need to get the recipe from him. The recipe is the same regardless of where it comes from.


parados wrote:
This is just another one of your malicious lies.

Nope. The truth is not a lie, no matter how inconvenient you find it.


parados wrote:
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.

Maybe so, but they are ingredients in a recipe for a concoction that makes a drug taste good.


parados wrote:
You are intentionally and maliciously lying about what is required to make Poor Man's PCP.

Not possible, as I have not commented on the requirements for creating Dextromethorphan to begin with.

What I have done is tell the truth about the recipe for the concoction that Trayvon used to make his "Poor Man's PCP" taste good.


parados wrote:
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.

No. But they sell "Poor Man's PCP" to minors when they sell them certain cough syrups though.


parados wrote:
Not even you can believe that lie.

Well, I would not characterize it as a lie. I'd just call it an inaccurate representation of my position.

I believe that your inaccuracy is an honest mistake, and is not malicious.


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

Really?

Yes.


parados wrote:
What specific concentration does it show?

It doesn't.


parados wrote:
I am just curious because I know you posted the texts and there is nothing in those texts about any concentrations.

What is the point of asking about something that you know doesn't exist?


parados wrote:
What part sugary drink to what part dxm does Trayvon say he is mixing?

As you've just admitted, he doesn't say.


parados wrote:
This is just another demonstrable lie on your part.

No, the fact that you ask a question about something you know does not exist does not show any inaccuracy on my part, much less an intentional and malicious inaccuracy.


parados wrote:
We can only conclude it is malicious and intentional since we know you have posted the texts and probably read them.

The fact that I am aware that Trayvon posted about using "Poor Man's PCP" does not indicate any malice on my part.


parados wrote:
oralloy wrote:
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?

I admit that he had no Dextromethorphan on him.

It is pretty clear that he had some Dextromethorphan stashed somewhere.

Clarification: I am not saying he was making Dextromethorphan. I am saying he was mixing Dextromethorphan with Skittles and AriZona Watermelon Flavored Fruit Drink.


parados wrote:
You can't make it without dxm.

There is a bit of confusion here.

"Poor Man's PCP" is not something that is made "from" Dextromethorphan.

"Poor Man's PCP" is Dextromethorphan.


parados wrote:
This points out the lie and points to knowing it was a lie. This would again mean your lie was intentional and malicious.

I'm a bit unclear which statement of mine you are referring to, but since all I've done is state the absolute truth, there is no lie in anything I've said.


parados wrote:
Tell us Oralloy, how was Martin going to make Poor Man's PCP without dxm?

There is a bit of confusion here.

"Poor Man's PCP" is not something that is made "from" Dextromethorphan.

"Poor Man's PCP" is Dextromethorphan.


parados wrote:
Until you can cite exactly where the dxm was any argument that he was intending to do that is lie on your part.

Nonsense.
oralloy
 
  -1  
Fri 9 Aug, 2013 04:44 am
@parados,
parados wrote:
oralloy wrote:
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.

I don't have it in his own words, but you mix the cough syrup with the AriZona Watermelon Flavored Fruit Drink, then you dissolve some Skittles in it.


parados wrote:
Not someone else's recipe because you clearly state you have "his recipe."

The difference between his recipe and most other people's is: most people who drink this concoction use cough syrup with Codeine. They regard the use of "Poor Man's PCP" as insane.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  4  
Fri 9 Aug, 2013 07:20 am
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:

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.

Suddenly you don't like your logic? Hmmm.. I wonder why.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  4  
Fri 9 Aug, 2013 07:33 am
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:

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

Really? And where was the third ingredient?

No idea.
Which shows your statement was a lie and the lie was malicious and intentional. You admit you have no evidence yet you made a claim that had the third ingredient

Quote:

parados wrote:
I would like facts not speculation on your part.

Well, you've come to the right place if you're looking for someone who will stick to the facts and not speculate.
Since you won't speculate, explain how this is a factual statement and not speculation since you have just admitted you have no idea where the primary ingredient could be found by Martin.
[quote"oralloy"]
That "unarmed kid" was possibly high on dissociative hallucinogens (probably the most messed up drugs ever to hit the streets), was carrying ingredients to brew even more dissociative hallucinogens, was casing houses to break into later, and was in the process of violently assaulting Mr. Zimmerman when he was shot.[/quote]
I count 4 instances of speculation on your part in that one statement or we can just call them lies.
We already know your "possibly high" statement was factually untrue. Since you just claimed you don't speculate that would make that part of the statement a lie on your part.
What ingredient was Martin carrying that could brew dissociative hallucinogens? Nothing he was carrying could be used to make dxm. That would make that part of the statement a lie on your part.
There is no evidence of Martin casing houses so that is simply speculation on your part bus since you don't speculate, that would make it a lie.
Zimmerman claimed Martin had pulled back when he shot him so again, you are speculating that a violent assault was occuring when Martin was shot.

Quote:

But unfortunately I do not know where Trayvon stashed his drugs.
I wonder if you haven't been taking the hallucinogens you claim Martin hadf based on your claims you don't lie and you don't speculate.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  3  
Fri 9 Aug, 2013 07:45 am
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:

parados wrote:
oralloy wrote:
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.

No, my statement was the truth, and therefore not a falsehood, much less an intentional and malicious falsehood.

Please explain how he can not have it on him at the same time he is carrying it it?
Quote:
was carrying ingredients to brew even more dissociative hallucinogens



Quote:
parados wrote:
The fact that he didn't have any IS evidence that he didn't have any no matter what you try to argue.

No. The fact that he didn't have any on him is not evidence that he didn't have any.

The fact that he didn't have any on him is evidence that he wasn't carrying it.


Quote:
parados wrote:
oralloy wrote:
No, the truth isn't a lie, no matter how inconvenient it is.

The truth is you have no evidence of any dxm anywhere.

True. But I have evidence that he was acquiring the other ingredients in his recipe.

Since you haven't provided a recipe, we can only assume you are speculating. But since you don't speculate, then we have to assume you are lying. Or were you lying about how you never speculate?



Quote:

parados wrote:
The fact that you know he had none on him makes your lies intentional and malicious.

You seem a bit confused about what a lie is.

You seem a bit confused about how someone can be carrying something but not have it on them.

Quote:

Lies are intentional and malicious by definition. If a falsehood is not intentional and malicious, then it is not a lie.
You are just confused? Let me ask you oralloy, did you intentionally tell us you never speculate? Or was that an accident?

Quote:

That said, the fact that my statements are completely true means that there is no falsehood or lie in anything I say.
Contradictory statements that are mutually exclusive can't both be true. This is just another example of a lie on your part when you claim that all your statements are completely true.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  3  
Fri 9 Aug, 2013 07:47 am
@oralloy,
Quote:

The fact that I refuse to make a claim when I do not know the truth shows that I have considerable honor and integrity.

ROFLMAO.
OK, so did you claim Martin was "possibly high" or did you refuse to make that claim because you have honor and integrity? Since you did make the claim we are left to conclude you don't have honor and integrity.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  4  
Fri 9 Aug, 2013 07:51 am
@oralloy,
Quote:

Wrong. Skittles and AriZona Watermelon Flavored Fruit Drink were two of the ingredients in his recipe.

Funny thing there oralloy. I can find NO recipe for "purple drank" that includes Watermelon Flavored Fruit drink that existed before Martin was killed. All "recipes" that exist since then are claims by RW pundits that Martin was doing that with what he was carrying.

I challenge you to find any recipe that lists anything other then lemon/lime soda prior to June 2012. I'll bet you find none. Again, we see you are lying because Martin couldn't have followed a recipe that exists only after he died.
parados
 
  4  
Fri 9 Aug, 2013 07:52 am
@oralloy,
Quote:
To ascribe malice to "me wondering if Trayvon was screened for Dextromethorphan" is silly.

You were just wondering. I guess you wonder while not speculating. Your phrasing when you wonder seems to be rather definitive in nature with no mention of "wondering" in your statements.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Fri 9 Aug, 2013 08:35 am

In my opinion, it matters not whether travon was high
in the last hour of his life. What counts is that he attempted to murder Zimmy, for no reason.




David
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Sat 10 Aug, 2013 10:04 am
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:

There has to be a higher standard to see that justice works for both individuals. The guy with the gun always has the last say and we often have only his word for it. The law is tailor made for such people to get away with murder.

Absolute nonsense. The law says that people may use deadly force if they have a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or bodily harm. Every living creature has a basic right to defend itself.
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Sat 10 Aug, 2013 11:42 am
@Brandon9000,
They have that right when they act reasonably. But the stand your ground law is a loophole waiting to be used.
edgarblythe
 
  4  
Sat 10 Aug, 2013 11:55 am
@edgarblythe,
Consider the most famous case of SYG law being used. A kid walks to the grocery store and buys Skittles. As he is walking home he is profiled by a man and stalked. The man has a gun. The kid has a bag of candy. The man ignores the 9!! operator and continues to stalk the kid. The kid should have the right to stand up to the man stalking him, but apparently last man standing is the only one allowed to invoke the law. Hence, SYG laws are a license to kill.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Sat 10 Aug, 2013 01:48 pm
@parados,
This argument goes nowhere fast: Martin was checked for drugs, and the only one found was a small trace of marijuana. All the other speculations are SPECULATIONS without any evidence.

TNCFS
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  2  
Tue 13 Aug, 2013 09:09 am
@edgarblythe,
you have a way of simplifying the case so that even the strict Limbaughians can understand
OmSigDAVID
 
  0  
Tue 13 Aug, 2013 09:35 am

Legislation that seeks to protect violent criminals
by threatening their victims with long-term incarceration
for counter-attacking the predators without first turning around and RETREATING
are effectively compulsory suicide laws for the innocent victims.

Woud u enact such a law against predatory attacks from
bears or cougars?? If not, then u shud not do so to protect criminals, either.
Liberals support such laws, because liberals are cheaters and thay support evil.

Thay encourage the result that (if the predatory event [e.g., a robbery] had no witnesses)
the successful victim will conceal that attempted robbery
and he will (if he is wise) dispose of the criminal 's dead corpse in secret,
then flee the scene thus to be safe from the dirty liberals who
enacted that statute against him.

Compulsory suicide laws for victims are bad.
Stand your ground laws cure them.





David
izzythepush
 
  0  
Tue 13 Aug, 2013 09:38 am
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:
Woud u enact such a law against predatory attacks from
bears or cougars??


Just what have you got against gay hairy men and randy middle aged women?
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Tue 13 Aug, 2013 08:26 pm
@izzythepush,
I did not know about the first one.

I hope that all is proceeding to your delight ?





David
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Tue 13 Aug, 2013 08:53 pm
@farmerman,
Thanks farmerman. If I had been on that jury I would not have voted to let the man go. They would have had to remove me from the jury to get a unanimous verdict.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 01/09/2025 at 11:33:03