More On "Stand Your Ground" in Florida
supporter
Top
supporter
Posted by howdy 3 years ago
did the "make my day" law in Colorado have the same effect?? Anyone in Colorado know that answer??
Top
supporter
Posted by Cory Cutting 3 years ago
I do not believe so. In fact, there have been several instances where the law has been applied/not applied appropriately. There have been a few, very recently, where someone was killed breaking into a house and was not charged. However, there was also the case of an old man who came outside and found two men attempting to steal his trailer and he shot them. The old guy was charged, and I believe found guilty, because there was no immediate threat to him or others.

When applied properly with sense and thought, it is a valuable law. But that doesn't mean one can just go around shooting people!
Top
supporter
Posted by howdy 3 years ago
Top
Posted by Steve Allison 3 years ago
I am not sure why people felt the need for these type of laws. You have always been able to claim selfdefense when defending yourself. If a prosecutor still pushed charges, you had a jury of 12 to plead selfdefense to. Remember you only have to convince 1 juror to dead lock a trial. This gives you a buffer of reasoning people to decide if an action was selfdefense or not. Creating these strange laws only emboldens people to pull a trigger when maybe they should have not. The checks and balances of our legal system work when given a chance. There was a case in Miles City's past where a woman got off by claiming she rode up and shot the man leaving town in a wagon because he needed killing. Her evidence was testimony of the day he had spent beating and raping her. The jury agreed and she was acquitted. Well those are my thoughts on the subject but I have a bit of a trusting nature when it comes to our legal system.
Top
supporter
Posted by Jeff Denton 3 years ago
My attorney friend tells me that the problem with justice today is, it's getting hard to find a fair and impartial jury. The breakdown in traditional American morals has really widened the gap between the public's sense of right and wrong. Is he correct?
Top
supporter
Posted by Frank Hardy 3 years ago
That's right. No, that's wrong!

FH
Top
supporter
Posted by howdy 3 years ago
IMO, this country is regressing to the wild west movies, where they had shootouts in the street, after goading your opponent into a gun battle...don't know how true to history those movies were, but so many folks think they have the right to carry and shoot anyone that displeases them....Incredibly stupid IMO
Top
founder
supporter
Posted by Amorette Allison 3 years ago
For the most part, the shoot-out in the street was the invention of dime novelists and Hollywood. Sadly, those "code of west" types are usually woefully informed as to what life was like in "the wild west." People used to get arrested in Miles City regularly for taking their weapon into a saloon and even worse, discharging it within the city limits.
Top
supporter
Posted by howdy 3 years ago
then perhaps the ones today are trying to pretend they are the big bad gunmen of movie fame so they can "feel" more like a Man LOL....
Top
supporter
Posted by Levi Forman 3 years ago
IMO, this country is regressing to the wild west movies, where they had shootouts in the street, after goading your opponent into a gun battle...don't know how true to history those movies were, but so many folks think they have the right to carry and shoot anyone that displeases them....Incredibly stupid IMO


Oh come on. This is a ridiculous statement. Every category of crime and violence is dramatically lower than it was 20 or 30 years ago in the US. I realize that this board is about sanctimonious blathering, but at least try to maintain some contact with reality.
Top
supporter
Posted by howdy 3 years ago
Oh come on. This is a ridiculous statement. Every category of crime and violence is dramatically lower than it was 20 or 30 years ago in the US. I realize that this board is about sanctimonious blathering, but at least try to maintain some contact with reality.



so it is lower...big deal...that has nothing to do with what I said...I meant that some of these new laws about standing your ground are foolish in and of themselves and that certainly isn't a sanctimonious blather...I am not in the gun control crowd at all...I was just mentioning that the crimes today seem a tad strange brought about by these strange new laws that everyone seems to be using to justify their actions...when in fact they are just wanting to shoot someone they find annoying...so stop attacking until you know what I am trying to say...maybe I expressed myself badly (which I wouldn't find surprising given my present tireness and circumstances)but that doesn't mean attack attack because you are afraid of gun control...I am not for gun control because I don't wish the government to have a list of everyones guns in case we are taken over someday by troopers in a coup de ta (sp?) (I know that sounds paranoid)but it could and has happened in other countries and as crazy as this country is getting, nothing would surprise me...do you still think I am out of touch with reality? well if you do, so be it...
Top
supporter
Posted by Wendy Wilson 3 years ago
Oh come on. This is a ridiculous statement. Every category of crime and violence is dramatically lower than it was 20 or 30 years ago in the US. I realize that this board is about sanctimonious blathering, but at least try to maintain some contact with reality.


One of the reasons crime, especially violent crime, is down is because the baby boomers are hitting their 50s and 60s. People tend to curb their violent or criminal tendencies as they age. It's one reason why the 70s were such a crime ridden era, all those 20 or 30 somethings running amok.
Top
supporter
Posted by Richard Bonine, Jr. 3 years ago
Wendy Wilson wrote:


One of the reasons crime, especially violent crime, is down is because the baby boomers are hitting their 50s and 60s. People tend to curb their violent or criminal tendencies as they age. It's one reason why the 70s were such a crime ridden era, all those 20 or 30 somethings running amok.


It's one reason why the early 70s were such a crime ridden era, all those 20 or 30 somethings running amok.


Fixed. I didn't want anyone to think that those of us entering our 20's in the late 70's were running amok.
Top
supporter
Posted by Bridgier 3 years ago
IMO, this country is regressing to the wild west movies, where they had shootouts in the street, after goading your opponent into a gun battle...don't know how true to history those movies were, but so many folks think they have the right to carry and shoot anyone that displeases them....Incredibly stupid IMO


I don't think Howdy's talking about crime, I believe she's talking about the air of vigilantism that seems to be on the rise - an air which you yourself noted as being produced and promoted by groups such as the NRA.

So perhaps howdy's not the only one guilty of a little "sanctimonious blathering".
Top
supporter
Posted by howdy 3 years ago
wow, Bridgier you are absolutely right about the difference and what I meant...thank you so very much...I am so dang tired after this weekend with the grandkids and their issues, that my brain doesn't always function well (not that it ever did LOL)...During the days of segregation, I actually witnessed a march one night in Durham of the KKK carrying torches and it was one of the most frightening things I have ever seen...People taking the law into their own hands because it suits their fancy has always bothered me probably due to growing up in those days of complete and total vigilantism to the black race and I have never forgotten it...However now that the government is being taken over by corporations and the Occupy movement is growing who knows what is in our future...thus my confusion, perhaps...but that doesn't negate my concerns about the individual taking these stupid new laws and using them to murder someone for absolutely no reason...Like the kid in Florida, who the police told the neighborhood watch guy to stop following him and instead he followed him and a fight happened and the kid was killed...and the other man (forgot the state) that went over to a neighbors house about the noise, and stood in their driveway shouting with an open cell phone to 911, don't make me do this, I feel my life is in danger, and the people on the porch said huh? do you want me to go get my gun too from inside and then the man outside shot and killed one of them...to me that is deliberate murder...
Top
supporter
Posted by Levi Forman 3 years ago
I don't see how anyone could read the above quoted sentence and regard it as anything but outrageous hyperbole, but that's the stock and trade of political discussion, so obviously I should just shut the hell up.
Top
supporter
Top
supporter
Posted by Levi Forman 3 years ago
I don't doubt that they may "increase homicides". That's not the same thing as "the country is regressing to wild west movies". We've established that you're not such a big fan of the shades of grey, but I'm just in favor of having a little perspective on these things and not getting carried away by the cable news frenzy.
Top
supporter
Posted by Bridgier 3 years ago
Hyperbole exists as a rhetorical device, and is useful when used correctly. Bitching about the medium and the format to avoid discussing the underlying message is just as terrible as engaging in intemperate metaphor.

And I disagree most strongly with your contention that somehow you see the shades of grey better than the rest of us.
Top
supporter
Posted by howdy 3 years ago
Levi, you just take everything I say as literal...If I said this bag weighs a ton, you would think I really meant a ton I guess...Perhaps if you would lighten up a bit and realize I am using hyperbole to press my point (even tho you disagree with my point) you would feel better about our discussion...No sense in getting angry about it all...Attacking me doesn't disprove the point...just disagree and give your points why...and I am very comfortable with shades of grey...aren't you?
Top
supporter
Posted by Levi Forman 3 years ago
You're assuming that I disagree with the idea that the "stand your ground" laws are bad, which I have never said and in fact do not believe. I am just offended by the hysteria over it and the idea that the US is becoming like a wild west movie is ridiculous, which is the only assertion that I have made. Exaggeration can be used to make a point, but pushing it to extremes in the way that is extremely common in political discussion makes it impossible to have a reasonable discussion on any topic.

[This message has been edited by Levi Forman (6/12/2012)]
Top
supporter
Posted by howdy 3 years ago
you forgot to add "in your opinion" at the end of your sentence...I made the wild west comment because I watch a lot of those old cheesy westerns while I am confined to this chair at home...I see these old chessy shows daily and wonder about the mind sets of these characters (yes I know it is all play acting)taking the law into their own hands over something trivial or unproven like false accusations, etc...and then along comes some "do gooder" crowd or duo and let the gunplay begin...or throw the rope over the tree limb...all hyperbole talk, Levi, in case you don't recognize it...I am just sick and tired of people using these new laws to justify murder...Justifiable murder has increased in this nation bigtime since the beginning of these laws...Why?? Is it really necessary to have these laws to fall back on or shouldn't we be able to stand up in court and defend our actions and let our peers judge us?? In case you still don't get my cheesy western comment, those people were taking the law into their own hands as are the ones nowadays that use these new laws to justify murder...

[This message has been edited by howdy (6/12/2012)]
Top
supporter
Posted by Levi Forman 3 years ago
I didn't have any trouble understanding your original post, but thanks for the repeated condescending explanations.
Top
supporter
Posted by howdy 3 years ago
You are welcome and if you take that as being condescending I find that funny...I was simply trying to explain it as simply as I could so that I was sure you would understand my meaning...now that I obviously did that, you call me condescending....Obviously you love to all names...Good luck with that...
Top
supporter
Posted by Bridgier 3 years ago
I just have this image of a billboard - a dusty western street with a bunch of dead cowboys lying strewn about, with a big caption: "METAPHOR - NOT EVEN ONCE".
Top
supporter
Posted by Levi Forman 3 years ago
Lets just have threads where we call each other Hitler over and over. It will be great and so worthwhile.
Top
supporter
Posted by howdy 3 years ago
but Levi, you are the one that is calling names...I don't remember calling names...and LOL Bridgier...
Top
supporter
Posted by Bridgier 3 years ago
Godwin - You lose...
Top
supporter
Posted by Levi Forman 3 years ago
If I was calling names, I would have called YOU condescending. I said that your posts suggesting that the only explanation for me taking offense to your post is that I did not understand it were condescending. I know this subtle difference might be beyond your understanding (see, I can do it too).

Hmm, looks like I have to explain Godwin's law to Bridgier as well.

<long, self-righteous sniff>

[This message has been edited by Levi Forman (6/12/2012)]
Top
supporter
Posted by howdy 3 years ago
Levi, I am tired and sick of these silly posts of yours and the games you play....I was trying to have a discussion about these new laws and you call me hysterical and anytime I disagree, you have another name for me...I respectfully bow out of this discussion and return to my cheesy westerns and my comfortable chair (most days)...My final thought is, I am not surprised you and I don't see eye to eye on most things as you are a conservative and I am most definately not...thankfully...do have fun and I happily leave my position in the capable hands of Bridgier...
Top
supporter
Posted by Bridgier 3 years ago
Dude... you mentioned hitler first, and I can't find any other reference to "Nazi" in the thread, so I'm pretty sure I'm safe in invoking Godwin here.

Anyways... I'm an INTP myself, so I know how easy it is to get lost in the weeds of debating definitions and ground rules before moving on to the substance of whatever matter it is being discussed - but I think fixating on the FORM of the argument over the ESSENCE isn't helpful.

And it makes you sound a little cranky.
Top
supporter
Posted by cj sampsel 3 years ago
Boy, I'd hate to see Levi and Howdy meet on Main Street if they were both armed.
Let me get back on track. Like most things the want "to carry"
has several reasons. Mentioned have been fear for personal safety
and the "Wild West" mentality. I think another reason is wanting to be a hero. I've heard several people say things like, "If I'd been
there when that nut shot Gabby in Arizona last year I'dve taken him out before so many people got shot." Can you imagine what would happen if in a situation like that numerous people got the hero bug.
By the way I own multiple firearms have no desire to carry and will
not belong to the NRA.
Top
supporter
Posted by Bridgier 3 years ago
TBH, when I hear someone talking about how they need to carry for "personal protection", I put them into the "people to avoid outside of work" category.

A civilized state needs to maximize its monopoly on deadly violence. Allowing it to be outsourced to random citizens is bad - to then further allow the bar to be lowered to whatever subjective feeling that citizen may be experiencing is, if you'll forgive a little hyperbole, insane.

Of course, a civilized state also needs to maximize civil oversight of said monopoly, and conduct that oversight in a transparent manner, and hold all people equal before the bar of law, and a hundred other things that we don't really do, so I guess letting people get in touch with their inner Walter Mitty's is as cool as any other idea we've had lately.
Top
supporter
Posted by howdy 3 years ago
LOL, CJ, meeting me anywhere with a gun would never happen as I am a little ole lady that walks with a walker or rides a little electric scooter so the image might be hysterically funny....ROFL...also if a bullet hit my oxygen tank I would be a goner...
Top
supporter
Posted by Levi Forman 3 years ago
Anyways... I'm an INTP myself, so I know how easy it is to get lost in the weeds of debating definitions and ground rules before moving on to the substance of whatever matter it is being discussed - but I think fixating on the FORM of the argument over the ESSENCE isn't helpful.


Honestly, I have nothing to say about the stand your ground laws. When I read these discussions I rarely engage anyone on the issue at hand. Not to say never, but as rarely as my self control can manage. I've been reading political discussions on the internet daily since I discovered Usenet in 1998. I used to type long posts and go through the line by line quote wars, but after a few years it becomes apparent that this is a not a worthwhile use of time or energy. A really interesting or thoughtful argument on a message board is about as common as a hen's molar and generally no one is thinking OR listening, just trying to score points for their chosen world view.

As a result, I have tried to move past that and the only thing that really gets me is when I see someone making an argument that I find to be irrational or nonsensical and that is usually when I decide to post. I'm not interested in debating definitions and ground rules, I just want people to make sense. When it comes down to it, fancying myself as an arbiter of logic or some sort of thread referee is yet another useless indulgence, but that's what I do. Maybe it isn't "helpful" but I don't see it as particularly more pointless than the rest of the thread.

And I believe that you have to make some sort of analogy involving nazis before Goodwin can be invoked, not just say the word.
Top
supporter
Posted by Bridgier 3 years ago
is when I see someone making an argument that I find to be irrational or nonsensical and that is usually when I decide to post.


So totally INTP.
Top
supporter
Posted by Levi Forman 3 years ago
INTJ actually, but good guess.
Top
supporter
Posted by Bridgier 3 years ago
More importantly - Order or Chaos Muppet?
Top
supporter
Posted by Levi Forman 3 years ago
Depends on the day.
Top
supporter
Posted by howdy 3 years ago
Explains a lot...
Top