UPNetwork  

Go Back   UPNetwork > General Forums > Debate

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-18-2013, 09:35 PM   #76
Rangeet
Foot, meet mouth.
 
Rangeet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Beyond the Wall
Posts: 4,362
Send a message via MSN to Rangeet Send a message via Skype™ to Rangeet
...What? We have no witnesses as to who attacked first. We do, however, have multiple witnesses confirming that Martin was laying a serious beatdown on Martin.
Rangeet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-19-2013, 02:19 PM   #77
Shuckle
Problematic Fave
 
Shuckle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: VA
Posts: 3,199
So far, I'm enjoying reading Talon and Firewater posts. However, there's something I would like to point out.

Guns are lethal weapons. In order to invoke a self-defense clause for using a gun, even if you shoot at the leg, foot, arm, etc., you must be threatened with an equally lethal force. There's some wiggle room with severe bodily harm, mutilation, defense of others, etc., but for the most part? If you are getting a gun pointed at you with intent to shoot, you may defend yourself by any means.

I'm disappointed in the media reaction. As usual, neither "side" is listening to the other, or (as it seems) anything about the case beyond the few facts sniffed up. As a country, we have come a remarkably long way with our racial baggage. Slavery, discrimination, Angel Island, the Chinese Exclusion Act, our agreements with Japan, the quotas set in the 1900s to keep Eastern Europeans from entering the country (still white! Apparently some people thought we ought to be England in America)...all that is behind us now. We have finally gone beyond what our ancestors thought...except for one place.

In the US, we have the right to free press. This means that the government cannot control what you say or write or do. There are exceptions, such as libel, slander, truth in advertising, and malicious intent, but for the most part, news outlets have the freedom to write about whatever they want.

Since 1898, with the advent of Yellow Journalism, newspapers have sought for profit and nothing else. Sensationalist headlines, often blatantly false, stirred up public excitement. And as much as I'd like to say we're past that now, we definitely aren't, and this shows it.

I'm fine with biased news sources, but I'm not fine with people following media opinions like so many lambs to the slaughter. Keep a level head. Have your own opinions. Use all the information available to make your case, and ensure that's it's right.

But we can't do that. Not without a better education system.
__________________
Shuckle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2013, 11:23 AM   #78
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
George Zimmerman helps family in car accident

Cue the conspiracy theories .............. now. (Would not surprise me if thousands of people have already alleged "THIS WAS STAGED! ")
Talon87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2013, 02:23 PM   #79
deoxys
Fog Badge
 
deoxys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,513
Someone on reddit put it best, based on the stories we've heard of George Zimmerman:

"this guy is the Home Depot parking lot version of Superman." "Mall Cop"
deoxys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2013, 03:26 PM   #80
Firewater
Volcano Badge
 
Firewater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,727
Send a message via Skype™ to Firewater
I don't know what to believe, or whether it's true or not. I still don't think it helps in the long run though.
__________________
PASBL: Record: 61-55-8, 361.5 TP, 174 KO, 2.5 SP, Trainer Level 5
My ASB pokes
Firewater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-23-2013, 03:51 PM   #81
Mozz
Golden Wang of Justice
 
Mozz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,936
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shuckle View Post
So far, I'm enjoying reading Talon and Firewater posts. However, there's something I would like to point out.

Guns are lethal weapons. In order to invoke a self-defense clause for using a gun, even if you shoot at the leg, foot, arm, etc., you must be threatened with an equally lethal force. There's some wiggle room with severe bodily harm, mutilation, defense of others, etc., but for the most part? If you are getting a gun pointed at you with intent to shoot, you may defend yourself by any means.

I'm disappointed in the media reaction. As usual, neither "side" is listening to the other, or (as it seems) anything about the case beyond the few facts sniffed up. As a country, we have come a remarkably long way with our racial baggage. Slavery, discrimination, Angel Island, the Chinese Exclusion Act, our agreements with Japan, the quotas set in the 1900s to keep Eastern Europeans from entering the country (still white! Apparently some people thought we ought to be England in America)...all that is behind us now. We have finally gone beyond what our ancestors thought...except for one place.

In the US, we have the right to free press. This means that the government cannot control what you say or write or do. There are exceptions, such as libel, slander, truth in advertising, and malicious intent, but for the most part, news outlets have the freedom to write about whatever they want.

Since 1898, with the advent of Yellow Journalism, newspapers have sought for profit and nothing else. Sensationalist headlines, often blatantly false, stirred up public excitement. And as much as I'd like to say we're past that now, we definitely aren't, and this shows it.

I'm fine with biased news sources, but I'm not fine with people following media opinions like so many lambs to the slaughter. Keep a level head. Have your own opinions. Use all the information available to make your case, and ensure that's it's right.

But we can't do that. Not without a better education system.
LInk?
__________________
Mozz's Van, named after Bulbagardens creditor, was a hidden forum section where staff members could share pictures of their tiny penises and engage in homosex. Sadly, HAVA media, Bulbagardens new corporate overlord, forced it's closure. Can't have porn on a children's website.
Mozz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2013, 01:44 PM   #82
Shuckle
Problematic Fave
 
Shuckle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: VA
Posts: 3,199
Spoiler: show
Combined with the principle of the state's monopoly of legitimate force, this means that those authorized by the state to defend the law (in practice, the police) are charged with the use of necessary force to protect such rights. The right to self-defense is limited to situations where the immediate threat of violence cannot be prevented by those authorized to do so (in practice, because no police force is present at the moment of the threat). The right to self-defense granted by law to the private citizen is strictly limited. Use of force that goes beyond what is necessary to dispel the immediate threat of violence is known as excessive self-defense (also self-defense with excessive force). The civil law systems have a theory of "abuse of right" to explain denial of justification in such cases. Thus, in English law, the general common law principle is stated in Beckford v R (198 1 AC 130:

"A defendant is entitled to use reasonable force to protect himself, others for whom he is responsible and his property. It must be reasonable."

Similar clauses are found in the legislation throughout the western world. They derive historically from article 6 of the French Penal Code of 1791, which ruled that "manslaughter is legitimate if it is indispensably dictated by the present necessity of legitimate defense of oneself or others".[17] The modern French penal code further specifies that excessive self-defense is punishable due to "disproportion between the means of defense used and the gravity of the attack" defended against.[18]
Google proved unhelpful for better sources because everyone wants karate lessons, so here's wikipedia.

Common law states that the force must be reasonable. This was a lesson that was drilled into my head in eighth grade Civics, that lethal force requires a lethal threat, and I didn't think to fact check so thoroughly, sorry Mozz.

It doesn't say anything about American law, but I'd imagine that it is lumped in with "the western world" because of how it acts with its legal system. Self-defense is justified only if reasonable defense is offered - if someone comes at you with a knife, you can shoot them because they can stab you and you will die from the stabbing. If someone tackles you, it would be illegal to shoot them (as Zimmerman, by the way, did), but it would be perfectly legal to:

~Kick him in the balls
~Pepper spray him until he passes out
~Shoot him...with a nerf gun
~Grapple on the street until they can be subdued
~Call 911 and let the cops handle it (which Zimmerman almost did but nooooo...)
~Run away like a pussy bitch
__________________
Shuckle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2013, 01:53 PM   #83
Mozz
Golden Wang of Justice
 
Mozz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,936
I'd assume that American law, and to a greater extent, laws in Texas and Florida, would consider getting your head drilled into pavement a life-threatening situation, allowing for the use of lethal force.
__________________
Mozz's Van, named after Bulbagardens creditor, was a hidden forum section where staff members could share pictures of their tiny penises and engage in homosex. Sadly, HAVA media, Bulbagardens new corporate overlord, forced it's closure. Can't have porn on a children's website.
Mozz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2013, 02:46 PM   #84
Shuckle
Problematic Fave
 
Shuckle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: VA
Posts: 3,199
See, that's the biggest problem with this case and the reason that Zimmerman walked free.

Nobody witnessed what happened except for Zimmerman and Martin.

Assuming Martin even did attack Zimmerman, we don't know if he was intending to subdue, threaten, scare away, confront, or kill Zimmerman. All we know is that they grappled on the pavement and one got shot by the other.

Had there been witnesses, the whole thing would just not have been so controversial, and it would be more about the facts of the case instead of racial prejudice.
__________________
Shuckle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2013, 03:03 PM   #85
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
Shuckle, are you basically saying then that no one should be allowed to ever use deadly force for self-defense unless they realize, in the heat of the moment, that they can prove it was self-defense afterwards? Not that their situation doesn't warrant it -- no, they realize it warrants it! -- but that if they cannot prove it afterwards then they shouldn't do it? Better to die by another's hand than to kill in unprovable self-defense?

I'm not saying Zimmerman was or was not in this position. Making no such judgment there in this post whatsoever. I'm just asking Shuckle to clarify his position on use of deadly force to defend oneself or one's family.
Talon87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2013, 08:22 PM   #86
Jerichi
プラスチック♡ラブ
 
Jerichi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: 蒸気の波の中
Posts: 14,766
I think this is interesting.

Also very well-sourced!

I encourage you to take the survey, or at the very least read through it.
__________________


私のことを消して本気で愛さないで 恋なんてただのゲーム 楽しめばそれでいい
閉ざした心を飾る 派手なドレスも靴も 孤独の友達

asbwffb

[jerichi]
Jerichi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2013, 09:41 PM   #87
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
An interesting read, though a lot of the questions are pretty leading and it's clear that the person who produced the survey has a clear agenda. (To their credit, they make absolutely no claims to hide this fact!) That stated, I felt #48 was a real clincher:

Quote:
During the interrogation of Zimmerman at the police station that night, Detective Chris Serino, who led the homicide investigation, told Zimmerman that someone had caught the entire incident on video. The detective was bluffing, but Zimmerman didn't know that. The detective said Zimmerman's reaction was "Thank God, I was hoping somebody would videotape it." Did you ever hear about this?
No, I never heard about this; and man, if that doesn't seal the deal. (Unless we want to seriously go down the unlikely route that Zimmerman is a world-class liar who is always ten steps ahead of everyone else and is able to conjure up the most believable reactions in a matter of milliseconds.)
Talon87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2013, 09:51 PM   #88
Jerichi
プラスチック♡ラブ
 
Jerichi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: 蒸気の波の中
Posts: 14,766
I really don't care to share my opinion on this whole debacle but I think it does help to demonstrate how poorly this case has been handled by the media (particularly and specifically the Today Show's really hamhanded editing of the 911 call). It turned from a really unfortunate assault case to virtual race war in a matter of days, and basically ended in character assassination of both parties and a really unproductive "dialogue" about race in the US.
__________________


私のことを消して本気で愛さないで 恋なんてただのゲーム 楽しめばそれでいい
閉ざした心を飾る 派手なドレスも靴も 孤独の友達

asbwffb

[jerichi]
Jerichi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2013, 02:13 AM   #89
deoxys
Fog Badge
 
deoxys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,513
Well... it's definitely clear whoever is running that has a huge bias as Talon said, but I'll be damned if I'm not at least a little impressed with all of the sources included. If you're going to be unrelentingly biased about something, that's the way to do it, I guess... still, was not aware of a lot of the things mentioned there.
deoxys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2013, 12:16 PM   #90
Firewater
Volcano Badge
 
Firewater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,727
Send a message via Skype™ to Firewater
I'll give the link credit- there are sources, but it's biased as hell, I mean biased to the point to where I wouldn't even have bothered to fill out the thing in most cases if I didn't want to know what their argument was. But this seems even more biased than other reports since the trial.

Also I'm kinda shaking my head at the random, "here's x thing Zimmerman did with a black person" comments.
__________________
PASBL: Record: 61-55-8, 361.5 TP, 174 KO, 2.5 SP, Trainer Level 5
My ASB pokes
Firewater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2013, 12:27 PM   #91
Mozz
Golden Wang of Justice
 
Mozz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,936
he has black friends so u must acquit imo
__________________
Mozz's Van, named after Bulbagardens creditor, was a hidden forum section where staff members could share pictures of their tiny penises and engage in homosex. Sadly, HAVA media, Bulbagardens new corporate overlord, forced it's closure. Can't have porn on a children's website.
Mozz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2013, 02:59 PM   #92
Firewater
Volcano Badge
 
Firewater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,727
Send a message via Skype™ to Firewater
I'm guessing this is a troll attempt, but having black friends doesn't mean you aren't a racist, lol.
__________________
PASBL: Record: 61-55-8, 361.5 TP, 174 KO, 2.5 SP, Trainer Level 5
My ASB pokes
Firewater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2013, 03:55 PM   #93
Jerichi
プラスチック♡ラブ
 
Jerichi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: 蒸気の波の中
Posts: 14,766
It still paints a very different picture of the case from what NBC and other similar news sources were painting; even if they have a clear lean towards one idea of the outcome, it -is- nice to have a dissenting view show their points in a clean and well-referenced fashion, even if it is under a bit of a dubious academic guise.

I think both sides were pretty horribly misrepresented and both sides held a good deal of responsibility in what happened. Unfortunately, one died and one didn't. This makes it polarizing from the start, and media outlets love polarizing issues, because it gets them viewers/readers. At least this presents a viewpoint outside of the major new media, and even if it's very obviously pandering to character, it does give a different view without Bill O'Riellying the whole spiel.
__________________


私のことを消して本気で愛さないで 恋なんてただのゲーム 楽しめばそれでいい
閉ざした心を飾る 派手なドレスも靴も 孤独の友達

asbwffb

[jerichi]
Jerichi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2013, 02:57 PM   #94
deoxys
Fog Badge
 
deoxys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,513
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/...d3a_story.html
deoxys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2013, 04:10 PM   #95
Firewater
Volcano Badge
 
Firewater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 4,727
Send a message via Skype™ to Firewater
Also, has anyone thought about the impacts to this case on the public at large? I don't mean for the two individuals involved (Zimmerman/Martin) and their families, but how does this change things for people in the US as a whole, especially in places where this law is in effect currently?


Edit:

@ Deoxys- after reading that link- I don't get the point- all it does is make the problem worse, some people respond in good ways, others respond in incredibly stupid ways such as this. Zimmerman's acquittal doesn't justify the crime, and all that these individuals did was to only justify the media/world representations of minorities that led to this profiling/incident.

The point is that media, US policy over time, etc. is racist as hell towards black people and has been when slavery started in the US. No matter that the US appears better, incidents like this give racists the ammo to continue to discriminate and profile minority people in ways that lead to tragedies, or murders of people without punishment. This isn't related to this topic, but I don't get the argument here that you are trying to make with this story.
__________________
PASBL: Record: 61-55-8, 361.5 TP, 174 KO, 2.5 SP, Trainer Level 5
My ASB pokes

Last edited by Firewater; 07-28-2013 at 04:44 PM.
Firewater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2013, 06:08 PM   #96
Mercutio
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 14,729
It doesn't really change anything. All it does is illustrate a number of problems in American* society and culture. You already had racial tension, you already had a sensationalist and reckless press, you already had a series of ridiculous laws and a reliance on outdated trial methods we know conclusively don't work. You already had a lot of guys with guns patrolling the streets. And there will always be a lot of tragedy in the world.

*much of the West's
Mercutio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2013, 08:01 PM   #97
deoxys
Fog Badge
 
deoxys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,513
Quote:
This isn't related to this topic, but I don't get the argument here that you are trying to make with this story.
I didn't say anything. I just linked an article I found. I don't have an agenda here. I saw it and I posted it. I don't know.

Quote:
but how does this change things for people in the US as a whole, especially in places where this law is in effect currently?
I think this is a really good question that the nation needs to talk about, and at the same time we need to discuss what "self-defense" is and when it isn't actually "self-defense". Especially when you compare this to the woman who fired a warning shot in the air and is now doing time for it - THAT is wrong.

Last edited by deoxys; 07-28-2013 at 08:14 PM.
deoxys is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2013, 11:09 AM   #98
Shuckle
Problematic Fave
 
Shuckle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: VA
Posts: 3,199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
Shuckle, are you basically saying then that no one should be allowed to ever use deadly force for self-defense unless they realize, in the heat of the moment, that they can prove it was self-defense afterwards? Not that their situation doesn't warrant it -- no, they realize it warrants it! -- but that if they cannot prove it afterwards then they shouldn't do it? Better to die by another's hand than to kill in unprovable self-defense?

I'm not saying Zimmerman was or was not in this position. Making no such judgment there in this post whatsoever. I'm just asking Shuckle to clarify his position on use of deadly force to defend oneself or one's family.
The use of lethal force is primarily a Western thing and as we have seen, it's incredibly difficult to define because of the capability to kill with knives, guns, bare hands, forks, household cleaners, cement sidewalks...pretty much anything you can get your hands on or bash someone against can become a lethal weapon in a fight.

It's a protective law; if someone holds you at gunpoint, you can justify your actions of taking their gun and shooting them dead. You can justify your actions of taking their gun and shooting them in the foot.

You cannot, however, justify your actions against someone holding you with the threat of punching you if you shoot and stab them repeatedly.

It may seem a little dumb to have a law that protects the aggressor, especially if the justice system fails spectacularly and you are charged with second degree murder for self-defense, as Zimmerman was. It can be inordinately tricky to justify a gunshot unless you can reasonably fear for your life or for the lives of others....as Zimmerman did.

However, it can turn a self defense allegation on its head pretty quickly if the charge is unjustified, in other words, the classic "bitch had it coming" defense adapted to be "bitch tried to hurt me so she had it coming." The prosecution can then go "Wait a minute here Are you trying to say that you, a 6'2", 300 pound man, feared for your life and felt that gunshots were necessary against a 5' 120 pound unarmed white woman, even though she had the one firearm in her house in her hands, which was a BB gun? " And then they'd be charged on the correct count instead of allowed to walk.

However, if that clause wasn't in place, and the aggressor threatened the man with the BB gun and he shot her 36 times "in self defense," the man would walk because he was defending himself. Food for thought.

It sucks in some cases where the law is clearly not the case in the matter - that Florida woman, for instance - but that's just a reminder that the justice system cannot rely on old laws to take care of new problems in every case. New laws must be drafted and old laws amended, and the government must improve to take care of issues that may not have been considered when the original laws past.
__________________
Shuckle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2013, 11:38 AM   #99
Talon87
時の彼方へ
 
Talon87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Lafayette, Indiana
Posts: 20,578
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shuckle View Post
The use of lethal force is primarily a Western thing and
I'm going to stop you right there.
Talon87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2013, 12:43 PM   #100
Shuckle
Problematic Fave
 
Shuckle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: VA
Posts: 3,199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon87 View Post
I'm going to stop you right there.
*Legal concept and restriction of

lolmybad
__________________
Shuckle is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation
Go Back   UPNetwork > General Forums > Debate


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:39 AM.


Design By: Miner Skinz.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.