User Tag List

First 31112131415 Last

Results 121 to 130 of 211

  1. #121
    Ghost Monkey Soul Vizconde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lateralus View Post
    Being called a racist is not the same as being discriminated against because you're black. Not even close. You sound like Randy Marsh.

    http://www.southparkstudios.com/full...-jesse-jackson
    Kinda is if they arrest you too.
    I redact everything I have written or will write on this forum prior to, subsequent with and or after the fact of its writing. For entertainment purposes only and not to be taken seriously nor literally.

    Quote Originally Posted by Edgar View Post
    Spamtar - a strange combination of boorish drunkeness and erudite discussions, or what I call "an Irish academic"

  2. #122
    Ghost Monkey Soul Vizconde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Edgar View Post
    Then maybe it's a good idea to look up case law as well.
    What does the case law say? Is it a Florida supreme court case?

    I really doubt it. I think that the assault (even if the defense for the assault is imperfect) is severable from the alleged murder.

    Ultimately it will depend on how the defense raises their prevention of a crime/self defense claims.
    I redact everything I have written or will write on this forum prior to, subsequent with and or after the fact of its writing. For entertainment purposes only and not to be taken seriously nor literally.

    Quote Originally Posted by Edgar View Post
    Spamtar - a strange combination of boorish drunkeness and erudite discussions, or what I call "an Irish academic"

  3. #123
    Yup
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    Istj
    Posts
    1,517

    Default

    one of the things that could be heard in zimmermans 911 call was him referring to trayvon as a coon. regardless if zimmerman is considered white or hispanic he wanted to play cop or soldier and there was some stereotyping.

    the thing that angers me most about the case is that the cops did not arrest zimmerman but allowed him to go free. there are tons of videos out there of cops treating people like crap, especially americans who`s skin falls into the not white color. there was a video of a cop planting drugs in a car, disgusting.

    to me, it lends truth to the observed pattern that has been pointed out many times, thing so ingrained in the collective consciousness of those americans who have shared this with me tacitly . unless you are white, your life and rights mean nothing. obama did not lend anything to the situation that those cops had done when they did not arrest George Zimmerman. they sent the wrong message. that is where things just spiraled out of control, right there.

    when you deny people justice in the face of out right unjust acts and gross misconduct and it is a constant thing, you better believe you are going to see vigilantism, because no one is protecting their rights as people. there is a setup more efficiently set up to prosecute and process through, maybe prove bias then find truth.

    many people assume people that play the race card are cry babies, i disagree. its connected to many things but the one that sticks out the most to me and makes think, shame on you america is over rick santorum.

    rick santorums campaign done well even though he said soooo much stupid shit. people just clapped their hands, he should have been out fast.
    when a politician does well, it is because he tapped into the consciousness of many americans that would support his agenda or share the same beliefs. to me, this is a reflection that strongly outlines the way americans most think. if this is the case than america has a hell of a long ways to go and ignorance is still a rampant problem.
    "I'm not in this world to live up to your expectations and you're not in this world to live up to mine. "
    -Bruce Lee

  4. #124

    Default

    Is stalking considered provocational? If so, what is the legal definition of stalking?

    I should add that I'm wondering if that can apply in this scenario.
    "The purpose of life is to be defeated by greater and greater things." - Rainer Maria Rilke

  5. #125
    Yup
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    Istj
    Posts
    1,517

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iwakar View Post
    Is stalking considered provocational? If so, what is the legal definition of stalking?

    I should add that I'm wondering if that can apply in this scenario.
    yes Elmer fudd was stalking
    "I'm not in this world to live up to your expectations and you're not in this world to live up to mine. "
    -Bruce Lee

  6. #126
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by iwakar View Post
    Is stalking considered provocational? If so, what is the legal definition of stalking?
    yes Elmer fudd was stalking
    No he wasn't.

    784.048 Stalking; definitions; penalties.—

    (1) As used in this section, the term:

    (a) “Harass” means to engage in a course of conduct directed at a specific person that causes substantial emotional distress in such person and serves no legitimate purpose.

    (b) “Course of conduct” means a pattern of conduct composed of a series of acts over a period of time, however short, evidencing a continuity of purpose. Constitutionally protected activity is not included within the meaning of “course of conduct.” Such constitutionally protected activity includes picketing or other organized protests.

    (c) “Credible threat” means a threat made with the intent to cause the person who is the target of the threat to reasonably fear for his or her safety. The threat must be against the life of, or a threat to cause bodily injury to, a person.

    (d) “Cyberstalk” means to engage in a course of conduct to communicate, or to cause to be communicated, words, images, or language by or through the use of electronic mail or electronic communication, directed at a specific person, causing substantial emotional distress to that person and serving no legitimate purpose.

    (2) Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks another person commits the offense of stalking, a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.

    (3) Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks another person, and makes a credible threat with the intent to place that person in reasonable fear of death or bodily injury of the person, or the person's child, sibling, spouse, parent, or dependent, commits the offense of aggravated stalking, a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

    (4) Any person who, after an injunction for protection against repeat violence, sexual violence, or dating violence pursuant to s. 784.046, or an injunction for protection against domestic violence pursuant to s. 741.30, or after any other court-imposed prohibition of conduct toward the subject person or that person's property, knowingly, willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks another person commits the offense of aggravated stalking, a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

    (5) Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks a minor under 16 years of age commits the offense of aggravated stalking, a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

    (6) Any law enforcement officer may arrest, without a warrant, any person he or she has probable cause to believe has violated the provisions of this section.

    (7) Any person who, after having been sentenced for a violation of s. 794.011 or s. 800.04, and prohibited from contacting the victim of the offense under s. 921.244, willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks the victim commits the offense of aggravated stalking, a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

    (8) The punishment imposed under this section shall run consecutive to any former sentence imposed for a conviction for any offense under s. 794.011 or s. 800.04.
    The facts as we know them, don't speak to any malicious intent, it was an isolated incident so there is no established pattern of behavior.

    So far as we know as this point, Zimmerman's actions fail to meet the basic threshold of misdemeanor stalking. There was no established pattern of behavior, and there was no malicious intent.

    @Edgar if you are sitting on some bombshell knowledge from case law in this instance, by all means, don't keep us breathless in anticipation.

  7. #127
    Yup
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    Istj
    Posts
    1,517

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    No he wasn't.



    The facts as we know them, don't speak to any malicious intent, it was an isolated incident so there is no established pattern of behavior.

    So far as we know as this point, Zimmerman's actions fail to meet the basic threshold of misdemeanor stalking. There was no established pattern of behavior, and there was no malicious intent.

    @Edgar if you are sitting on some bombshell knowledge from case law in this instance, by all means, don't keep us breathless in anticipation.
    did 911 dispatch ask him to not follw trayvon? what did he do?
    "I'm not in this world to live up to your expectations and you're not in this world to live up to mine. "
    -Bruce Lee

  8. #128
    Tempbanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Enneagram
    8w9
    Posts
    14,031

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yakimadude View Post
    did 911 dispatch ask him to not follw trayvon? what did he do?
    Continue to follow. Which just tells us that Zimmerman isn't the sharpest tool in the shed.

    Disregarding the 911 request does not amount to stalking.

    I fail to see what you don't understand here.

    Everyone thinks they have the whole scoop and know exactly what happened.

    The criminal justice system (despite its faults) is waaaaaaaaay better at this than the court of public opinion.

    Given the tone of the national discussion, why don't we just bypass all this justice stuff and string him from a tree?

    The presiding Judge just recused herself, which was smart both because she did have a conflict of interest, and no matter what the court decides people are going to flip shit over it.

    I bet Judge Ito wished he could have recused himself before the OJ trial.

    If I was a judge I wouldn't want to touch this one with a 10' pole.

  9. #129
    Senior Member Lateralus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    MBTI
    ENTJ
    Enneagram
    3w4
    Posts
    6,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    I (and I think the court) would disagree.

    If Martin was still alive (assuming no shooting occurred), and the evidence reflects that Martin physically assaulted Zimmerman without any greater provocation than being followed, I think it would be an open and shut case of assault on the part of Martin.

    Certainly Zimmerman would get a strong talking to by the judge about his practices as a neighborhood watch participant, and the judge would probably recommend some sort of psychological counseling.

    But that's the way it works.

    The fact that Zimmerman's actions set the stage for the confrontation doesn't trump the fact that Martin initiated violence.

    I fear we've reached an impasse on this point, and will move on.
    I'm not arguing legality here. I'm not a lawyer or in any way qualified to argue what he should or should not be charged with in a legal sense. I'm arguing morality. Regardless of what the legal system says, I believe it is wrong for one individual to follow another individual, provoking a response out of him, then killing him because he "felt threatened". There is WAAAAAAAAAAY too much room for abuse. I don't like leaving things like this up for interpretation. Zimmerman was in no way qualified to determine whether or not Martin was a threat.

    There won't need to be, because the presumption will be that there was no justification for the shooting.

    Thus the onus will be on the shooter to prove that the shooting was justified.

    In this way the shooter in these cases isn't given the legal latitude they are under the current law.

    It's much harder to prove to the state that a shooting was justified, than it is to be able to sit back and defend against the state's accusation that it wasn't. Especially when there aren't any witnesses.

    This change in the law would act a disincentive to those who would use stand your ground as a license to kill.

    But the principle behind the law, that someone should be able to respond with deadly force if confronted with a deadly threat, is (in my humble opinion) sound.
    I'm not a fan of the guilty until proven innocent position, either. Your law would result in some innocent people going to prison. Sometimes there's just no way to know how "threatening" someone was. We certainly don't know in this case. Zimmerman might have been completely justified in shooting Martin or it could have been a cold-blooded murder and there's simply no way to know. That's why my problem is with the fact that Zimmerman was even there in the first place. He shouldn't have been following Martin. Period!
    "We grow up thinking that beliefs are something to be proud of, but they're really nothing but opinions one refuses to reconsider. Beliefs are easy. The stronger your beliefs are, the less open you are to growth and wisdom, because "strength of belief" is only the intensity with which you resist questioning yourself. As soon as you are proud of a belief, as soon as you think it adds something to who you are, then you've made it a part of your ego."

  10. #130
    Nerd King Usurper Edgar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Posts
    4,209

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    @Edgar if you are sitting on some bombshell knowledge from case law in this instance, by all means, don't keep us breathless in anticipation.
    I'm not sitting on any bombshells, sorry.
    But generally speaking, if you initiate an altercation, you won't have much of an excuse in using deadly force.

    And just to be clear, I wasn't speculating on what Zimmerman supposedly did or didn't do - I was just answering Jock's post as to how the law usually works across the states.
    Listen to me, baby, you got to understand, you're old enough to learn the makings of a man.

Similar Threads

  1. Game of Thrones / G.R.R. Martin's "A Song of Ice and Fire" (tv & book series)
    By nightwatcher in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 145
    Last Post: 01-30-2017, 07:59 AM
  2. steve martin?
    By Lady_X in forum Popular Culture and Type
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 08-02-2010, 06:47 PM
  3. Villagers shoot down advertising balloon over country park
    By Sniffles in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 12-20-2008, 11:59 PM
  4. SHOOT TO KILL!
    By ByMySword in forum The Fluff Zone
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: 02-18-2008, 11:59 PM
  5. Iraq-Bound Soldier Hires Hitman To Shoot Him
    By heart in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 07-24-2007, 07:34 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO