[quote]Claudan wrote:
Moral of the story : Don’t smoke weed or you will go to jail !!!
I’m not stopping tho!!![/quote]
Moral of the story: Don’t physically assault a person for following you after you smoke weed or you might go to jail or worse.
Other moral: Don’t get out of your car and follow someone after 911 tells you not to. Especially if you’re carrying a handgun.
[quote]sam_sneed wrote:
Other moral: Don’t get out of your car and follow someone after 911 tells you not to. Especially if you’re carrying a handgun.
[/quote]
police dispatchers have no authority
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
Yep just saw that. Seems like an acquittal is on the way. The real questions now become: what is the fallout of Zimmerman walking and where is DarkNinjaa when the case is going against her…?
[quote]Mr. Walkway wrote:
[quote]sam_sneed wrote:
Other moral: Don’t get out of your car and follow someone after 911 tells you not to. Especially if you’re carrying a handgun.
[/quote]
police dispatchers have no authority [/quote]
More to the point, it was established in the trial that Mr. Zimmerman did not go follow Mr. Martin.
Mr. Zimmerman was parked on the “alley” side of the houses and had to get out of the car and go past the houses to get the street number as requested by the dispatcher so the cops knew where in the neighborhood to go. (There are no numbers on the alley side.)
You’d have to own a genuinely alpha brain if you get high, and then wrestle someone with a hand-gun.
[quote]four60 wrote:
Please. This case has more to do with armed citizens than Race even though the media and politicians are doing a great job of making you think otherwise. Playing the public like puppets.[/quote]
I think it should be about carry permits, but this really isn’t about that, although you keep repeating that it is.
Also, laws are for the law abiding. If you take the guns from the folks who can own and carry them legally, do you really think criminals will not use them? That the criminals who are law breakers in the first place are going to think “uh oh… I better not use a gun on my B&E or rape?”
really?
Again
Laws are for the law abiding. I say make ammunition more expensive and if you use a gun during the act of a criminal activity, let the sentence reflect that.
Do not punish law abiding folks for criminals.
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
[quote]Mr. Walkway wrote:
[quote]sam_sneed wrote:
Other moral: Don’t get out of your car and follow someone after 911 tells you not to. Especially if you’re carrying a handgun.
[/quote]
police dispatchers have no authority [/quote]
More to the point, it was established in the trial that Mr. Zimmerman did not go follow Mr. Martin.
Mr. Zimmerman was parked on the “alley” side of the houses and had to get out of the car and go past the houses to get the street number as requested by the dispatcher so the cops knew where in the neighborhood to go. (There are no numbers on the alley side.)[/quote]
You are so my favorite poster.
From reading the last few pages it seems like most of you feel zimmerman was justified in taking Trayvons life?
[quote]Claudan wrote:
You’d have to own a genuinely alpha brain if you get high, and then wrestle someone with a hand-gun.
[/quote]
It’s funny because I agree with this %100 from personal experience but I was just listening to a Joe Rogan podcast and he was saying he and many people he trains martial arts with smoke weed beforehand because it allows them to better “feel” the moves. But yeah add a gun into the mix, and he either had giant balls or a tiny brain…likely the latter
[quote]The Athlete wrote:
From reading the last few pages it seems like most of you feel zimmerman was justified in taking Trayvons life?[/quote]
Not so much ‘justified’ but that he should not be prosecuted for murder.
[quote]Love Nike wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
Please. This case has more to do with armed citizens than Race even though the media and politicians are doing a great job of making you think otherwise. Playing the public like puppets.[/quote]
I think it should be about carry permits, but this really isn’t about that, although you keep repeating that it is.
Also, laws are for the law abiding. If you take the guns from the folks who can own and carry them legally, do you really think criminals will not use them? That the criminals who are law breakers in the first place are going to think “uh oh… I better not use a gun on my B&E or rape?”
really?
Again
Laws are for the law abiding. I say make ammunition more expensive and if you use a gun during the act of a criminal activity, let the sentence reflect that.
Do not punish law abiding folks for criminals.[/quote]
What?? Are you even talking about this case?
[quote]RampantBadger wrote:
[quote]The Athlete wrote:
From reading the last few pages it seems like most of you feel zimmerman was justified in taking Trayvons life?[/quote]
Not so much ‘justified’ but that he should not be prosecuted for murder.[/quote]
This
[quote]no_name_narrator wrote:
[quote]Claudan wrote:
You’d have to own a genuinely alpha brain if you get high, and then wrestle someone with a hand-gun.
[/quote]
It’s funny because I agree with this %100 from personal experience but I was just listening to a Joe Rogan podcast and he was saying he and many people he trains martial arts with smoke weed beforehand because it allows them to better “feel” the moves. But yeah add a gun into the mix, and he either had giant balls or a tiny brain…likely the latter [/quote]
I’ve heard Rogan say that too, and from personal experience, just like you, I don’t really feel very ‘fighty’ when I’m high, but I love lifting weights for example.
[quote]The Athlete wrote:
From reading the last few pages it seems like most of you feel zimmerman was justified in taking Trayvons life?[/quote]
“Not guilty” means “not guilty.” It does not mean “innocent.”
Although, as the facts have come out, Mr. Zimmerman appears more reasonable than I originally thought.
I’ve tried a lot of cases. I could see a manslaughter verdict or, more likely, a criminally negligent homicide verdict simply because it is an all women jury and all women juries tend to be “compromise” juries in my experience.
But I doubt even that, at this point.
Well since its highly unlikely that Zimmerman will be convicted, I think what we should be asking ourselves is; “What happens after this is over with?”
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]Love Nike wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
Please. This case has more to do with armed citizens than Race even though the media and politicians are doing a great job of making you think otherwise. Playing the public like puppets.[/quote]
I think it should be about carry permits, but this really isn’t about that, although you keep repeating that it is.
Also, laws are for the law abiding. If you take the guns from the folks who can own and carry them legally, do you really think criminals will not use them? That the criminals who are law breakers in the first place are going to think “uh oh… I better not use a gun on my B&E or rape?”
really?
Again
Laws are for the law abiding. I say make ammunition more expensive and if you use a gun during the act of a criminal activity, let the sentence reflect that.
Do not punish law abiding folks for criminals.[/quote]
What?? Are you even talking about this case?[/quote]
absolutely I am.
But I am also talking about ramifications from the case. Just to put it out there, I thought he should have been charged with manslaughter. Not murder. I just don’t know what the prosecution is thinking. I guess they are going with the since he had a weapon then his intent was to kill.
I should have couched my earlier message better. I do not think Trayvon should have been killed. That isn’t even a question for me.
But, this isn’t a weapons issue now, at least not in the public.
[quote]Totenkopf wrote:
Well since its highly unlikely that Zimmerman will be convicted, I think what we should be asking ourselves is; “What happens after this is over with?”[/quote]
Depends on the verdict. Guilty there is a celebration in the streets with looting and the like. If not guilty there is a riot in the streets with looting and the like.
[quote]RampantBadger wrote:
Not so much ‘justified’ but that he should not be prosecuted for murder.[/quote]
Oh ok, I see.
[quote]Jewbacca wrote:
“Not guilty” means “not guilty.” It does not mean “innocent.”
Although, as the facts have come out, Mr. Zimmerman appears more reasonable than I originally thought.
I’ve tried a lot of cases. I could see a manslaughter verdict or, more likely, a criminally negligent homicide verdict simply because it is an all women jury and all women juries tend to be “compromise” juries in my experience.
But I doubt even that, at this point.
[/quote]
I should have indicated before but I meant more from a moral perspective and not a legal 1.
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
[quote]Totenkopf wrote:
Well since its highly unlikely that Zimmerman will be convicted, I think what we should be asking ourselves is; “What happens after this is over with?”[/quote]
Depends on the verdict. Guilty there is a celebration in the streets with looting and the like. If not guilty there is a riot in the streets with looting and the like.[/quote]
Thank God we live in Texas, friend. There won’t be looting here. Not ever.
[quote]Love Nike wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
[quote]Love Nike wrote:
[quote]four60 wrote:
Please. This case has more to do with armed citizens than Race even though the media and politicians are doing a great job of making you think otherwise. Playing the public like puppets.[/quote]
I think it should be about carry permits, but this really isn’t about that, although you keep repeating that it is.
Also, laws are for the law abiding. If you take the guns from the folks who can own and carry them legally, do you really think criminals will not use them? That the criminals who are law breakers in the first place are going to think “uh oh… I better not use a gun on my B&E or rape?”
really?
Again
Laws are for the law abiding. I say make ammunition more expensive and if you use a gun during the act of a criminal activity, let the sentence reflect that
.
Do not punish law abiding folks for criminals.[/quote]
What?? Are you even talking about this case?[/quote]
absolutely I am.
But I am also talking about ramifications from the case. Just to put it out there, I thought he should have been charged with manslaughter. Not murder. I just don’t know what the prosecution is thinking. I guess they are going with the since he had a weapon then his intent was to kill.
I should have couched my earlier message better. I do not think Trayvon should have been killed. That isn’t even a question for me.
But, this isn’t a weapons issue now, at least not in the public. [/quote]
The public has been told what to think on both sides from the beginning by either someone in office or the media. And once this trial ends you may see some grumblings helll maybe a store break in or two ( with dumb asses claiming it was for trayvon). But what really will be driven by this is a bill maybe even in Trayvons name to stop “GUN” violence. Race is only the selling point to get the uninterested involved.