[News] The Trayvon Martin Discussion Thread

Krisken

Krisken

GasBandit said:
There were equivalencies of which I gave examples. You're just being intentionally obtuse. The 2nd amendment is cut and dry. You can bear a musket, you can bear an AK-47, you can bear a grenade or a launcher.. you can't physically "bear" a howitzer or an abrams or a nuke, any more than you could "bear" a revolutionary war cannon or frigate.
Click to expand...
Right, and I don't find those things equivalent . It's not being obtuse, it's saying that just because you can carry it you should be able to have it ignores the escalation of destructive power one can 'carry'. They aren't equal, and it constantly befuddles me that you think it is.
 
M

makare

I am pissed that I am not allowed to haul around a howitzer! I am feeling infringed all to hell right now. :mad:
 
ElJuski

ElJuski

Staff member
Dude's either killed himself or he's in some backwater burg in the states. Those are my top two bets.
 
Adam

Adam

In light of this new information, I guess the thread title should be changed to

Trayvon Martin was killed and his accused second degree murderer has been charged.

And I guess his former attorney's aren't too happy to find out he's in custody. After all, they have no idea where he is.
 
S

Soliloquy

We never truly know if justice is ever served. We just sit, listen, and hope that what is coming out is the truth.
 
Bumble the Boy Wonder

Bumble the Boy Wonder

Did you see the statement from Trayvon's family?

Where his mom says "The heart has no color. It is not black, or white. It is red!"

...FIRST PLUTO, NOW RED?

THE WORLD I KNOW IS DEADDDDDD
 
S

Soliloquy

@Li3n said:
Think about it a bit...
Click to expand...
I'm not an anarchist. Neither is Gas. The government is needed to keep the peace, regulate commerce, etc. That doesn't mean that giving the government too much unchecked power is a good thing.

EDIT: I think James Madison said it better than I can, though.

If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.
Click to expand...
 
fade

fade

Staff member
That's funny, because I would use the same argument to justify most liberal policies. More proof to my opinion that were all a bunch of rabid dogs fighting over the same slobbery tennis ball.
 
S

Soliloquy

Yeah, I guess the only thing we're arguing over is the degree of implementation, not the general underlying principle.

One side says too much power is being given to the government. The other says too little governance is being put over the people.

I'm the one who's right, of course. But hey, whatevs. :troll:
 
Adam

Adam

Trayvon's mom says it was an accident:

http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entries/trayvon-martins-mom-says-shooting-was-accident

"“I believe it was an accident,” Fulton said. “I believe that it just got out of control and he couldn’t turn the clock back. I would ask him, did he know that that was a minor, that that was a teenager, and that he did not have a weapon?”"

Trayvon's mom retracts comment:



"Earlier today, I made a comment to the media that was later mischaracterized. When I referenced the word 'accident' today with regard to Trayvon's death, in NO way did I mean the shooting was an accident. We believe that George Zimmerman stalked my son and murdered him in cold blood. The 'accident' I was referring to was the fact that George Zimmerman and my son ever crossed paths. It was an accidental encounter. If George Zimmerman hadn't gotten out of his vehicle, this entire incident would have been avoided."


Lawyer must have 'corrected' her.
 
Krisken

Krisken

Or, you know, helped her realize what a mistake it was to characterize the event as an 'accident' and that it gave the wrong impression of her feelings on the subject.
 
Adam

Adam

There's a pretty large gap between "“I believe it was an accident" and "We believe that George Zimmerman stalked my son and murdered him in cold blood", despite the lawyer speak. I don't think that's readily explained as "The wrong impression of her feelings" as much as "The wrong language for a civil suit"
 
sixpackshaker

sixpackshaker

Krisken said:
Or, you know, helped her realize what a mistake it was to characterize the event as an 'accident' and that it gave the wrong impression of her feelings on the subject.
Click to expand...
Accident was a bad word choice. I don't think George dropped the gun, having it discharge and strike the child.
 
M

makare

I don't think there is anything particularly lawyerly about stalked, murdered, or in cold blood.
 
fade

fade

Staff member
Welp. I don't lose my temper too often, but I did when arguing with my dad about this case. Unsurprisingly, he took the side against the black kid. It just bothered me the way the he was unwilling to see the possibility that what Zimmerman did might've been wrong. It really bothered me that he made the argument that Zimmerman was in the right because he was defending himself right after he said Zimmerman had accosted Martin. That just seemed like double speak to me. One can defend himself but the other couldn't. He acted like i was insane for even suggesting such a thing. I'm not suggesting that it's an absolutely equivalent situation, but to say I am insane for even mentioning it--that's just because I called him on the floor. Then because I got angry at the implication, he decided he was going to hang up on me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top