Printable View
I'm not saying that they should file suit, but I am saying that the civil bar is much lower. There is no "reasonable doubt" threshold for the plaintiff. The fact that nearly everyone suggests that Zimmermans actions were not usual in that he got out of his vehicle to watch or follow can place some contribution on him. It sucks, but the victim was unarmed and killed. In a liability breakdown, I would place 80% on the plaintiff and 20% on the defendant.
A Civil Rights case would be even harder to prove. The standard is even higher than the second degree murder one.
It would be stupid to try and the only way to get the verdict is through jury nullification IMO. There are places that could happen, however. And it is hard to say to what lengths this justice department would go to.
I agree. I'm talking about a negligence case. The civil rights case would be abusive and a waste of resources in this situation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherking
Pretty sure that no case can go forward; under Florida law, you cannot initiate a civil case when a killing has been found to be self-defense (which is the net result of the verdict—once self-defense was invoked, it put the burden on the prosecution to prove that the killing was not self-defense, and they failed). So Martin's family has no avenue for further litigation in the great state of Florida.Quote:
Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg
Likewise, I cannot see a civil rights case being brought. Several reasons why that dog won't hunt.
For good or ill, this case is over.
now to wait for the heat to die down.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur
Attachment 10418
A strong reminder of how everything you think you know about being a tough guy can result in the loss of the only life that you get. It is important to know that violence can and often will result in unnecessary death. America needs to grow up and use words to solve conflict. When words fail and danger persists, it can destroy everything. Every law abiding American has a "nuclear" deterent.
I havent been in fight since I was 16. Fighting is for kids. Adults are polite and courteous or they are shooting to stop conflict. There is no middle ground. If your laws allow you to be armed, arm. If not, fight the unjust law.
wow, never have I seen such a strange breed of logic. "Everyone here doesn't know how to sort disputes out with non violent means and the use of firearms is the absolute last resort and should never be used in anger". Putting that together you somehow get: "I think we should fight for the right to give all these people who can't deal with disputes without violence these dangerous last resort weapons. "Quote:
Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg
People who assault others should be barred from firearm ownership until they have shown themselves able to avoid that activity.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
'Still lets everyone get one free rampage, not exactly an improvement and ultimately it would still not prevent near as many gun deaths as an all out ban.
All out ban. Give me a break. Come and take them. We are expanding gun rights in this country.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
Ok then, you want to wallow in your astronomical murder, suicide and fatal accident rates for the chance to pretend to be a man for 5 minutes at a firing range, be my guest.
I've never handled a gun thinking it made me more manly
They were just there.....Not all of us are New York City boys like Tuffstuff.
Meh just my compulsion to use stereotypes and preconceptions leaking through instead of reasoned argument.
Regardless, the only proven method to put a serious and meaningful decline in those rates is abolition among civillians, and I have yet to find a reason to keep them that is not only relevant (second amendment might as well be a shopping list for all it's relevance today) and not a symptom of how screwed up society is.
Our suicide rates are not astronomical. You are making that up. In fact, as a limey, you are 4 countries away from us in rate. France is higher than the US, so is Japan, Belgium and many other modern, developed countries. You'd think that, since we own nearly 50% of all privately owned firearms and they are so much more effective for suicide, that it would be much higher, but you'd be completely wrong. Ironically, as much as minorities drive our high homicide rate, they also drive our lower suicide rate. Black Americans risk and use of suicide is dramatically lower than most other modern nations. Why? Who knows, maybe they are classed in the homicide rates as a sort of "death by cop"
I want every law abiding American to own at least 5 firearms. Black, White, etc. I take people to the range, we are doing quite well in reestablishing gun culture here in the suburbs of NYC, where Bloomberg is invited to eat complimentary turd sandwiches. The internet is amazing for it. Then, we are coming to Europe to spread their lawful use. Guns and self control make men and women free. Sound crazy? Good. Its a revolutionary idea. The old idea is that we should be coddled and protected from ourselves by our mommy, the State.
As an aside, I try not to carry during the day or around the house with a round chambered. It helps to reduce risk of fatal accident. At night, in an unusual area, you are probably better off carrying condition 1. greyblades, you should come to the US and I will take you to the range. It is a new world here and Americans who never really had the right are starting to grab it due to equal protections and stare decisis.
Firstly, yes you caught me in a bit of hypebolye it is not astronomical and I need to realign my argument to the actual data: your prevalence of firearms is making suicide an easier proposition to act on as exhibited by harvard's study. I also argue that due the variation of gun restrictions throughout the USA along state and county lines that the USA's overall suicide rate is being equalized by those states with greater gun restrictions as exhibited here,(the table right at the bottom of the page under "U.S. Suicide Statistics (2005)"), in it I see the high suicide rate states are the ones with the most lax gun restrictions as exhibited here (montana , nevada, alaska etc) and the low rates in states with high gun restriction (like new york, new jersy, rhode island etc).Quote:
Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg
"Revolutionary" is one word for it, making an army of suicide squirrels is "revolutionary", it's just not a good idea. That idea might help with the accident rate as teaching everyone gun safety will help prevent it, but I see that definitely exacerbating the suicide and homicide rates, if someone wants to kill themselves a gun is the easiest solution and making suicide harder to do makes it more likely prospective suicides will reconsider.Quote:
I want every law abiding American to own at least 5 firearms. Black, White, etc. I take people to the range, we are doing quite well in reestablishing gun culture here in the suburbs of NYC, where Bloomberg is invited to eat complimentary turd sandwiches. The internet is amazing for it. Then, we are coming to Europe to spread their lawful use. Guns and self control make men and women free. Sound crazy? Good. Its a revolutionary idea. The old idea is that we should be coddled and protected from ourselves by our mommy, the State.
As an aside, I try not to carry during the day or around the house with a round chambered. It helps to reduce risk of fatal accident. At night, in an unusual area, you are probably better off carrying condition 1. greyblades, you should come to the US and I will take you to the range. It is a new world here and Americans who never really had the right are starting to grab it due to equal protections and stare decisis.
As for murderers they aren't exactly going to be deterred by sessions at rifle ranges, its more likely to give them experience to make murderer's eventual exploits even more damaging.
As for the invite, I've been to america twice, I used a gun range once, I wasnt really enthused by the idea of a society where everyone having the capacity to do such easy damage to one another.
On the contrary, it is a classic example of an excellent idea:Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Thanks I was trying to figure out iCSD original handle based on posting pattern alone.Quote:
Originally Posted by Strike For The South
Long story short, your assumption that suicide rates in America are driven by firearms as opposed to everywhere else do not play out. Accessibility of firearms, while providing a more effective way to commit suicide, does not drive our rate to be any higher than any other country. In fact, Western nations have the same or higher rate across the board with almost no access to firearms. Give me a break. What percentage of gun suicides are done with "assault weapons", where you tend to only need 1 bullet? Probably even fewer than gun murders. Stick to banning kitchen knives and over cooking your meat in your own day-care center masquerading as a nation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyblades
Firearms are great, you guys are boring, Strike for the South wont know a good thing until it is gone. He effectively played the manliness card with me - I'm interested in guns for manly purposes whereas he is so manly that he doesn't even notice it. I play pokemon, hate beer and sports and look at pictures of cuddley puppies. I don't care about manliness. Trannies, women, nuns and cheerleaders should own firearms, too.
Which I've already explained with my "states shoring up (or down) the overall suicide rate" theoryQuote:
Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg
...assault weapons? Your argument sounds like you think I'm advocating only the removal of rifles.Quote:
Give me a break. What percentage of gun suicides are done with "assault weapons", where you tend to only need 1 bullet? Probably even fewer than gun murders
Yes that is ridiculous because knives are a tool with many different uses and violence is a perversion of the maker's intended use. Banning guns isnt ridiculous because their only purpose is to kill, their only reason for being is to kill.Quote:
Stick to banning kitchen knives and over cooking your meat in your own day-care center masquerading as a nation.
Your rate of murder and mass killings is much higher - part of that is access and glorification of firearms.Quote:
Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg
Oh - and we overcook the meat to make sure we don't get parasites that make us crazy, risk prone, and cause stillborns.
I don't want anyone to take anyone's guns away, I played the "joke" card in reference to Greyblades post.Quote:
Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg
I do think the idea that a tyrant would be stopped by privately owned firearms is a delusional fantasy, which assumes the tyrant doesn't have numbers and a militarized police force. Fascism/Communism/Tiddlywinks will come to America with most people thinking it's a good thing. A gun is only as good at safeguarding liberty as the brain behind it. To quote an oft repeated trope " a gun is just a tool". The same tool can just as easily be used to oppress .
I'm all for guns in personal safety. The lack of manners in the public sphere is appalling and would be better served by more guns. I would like to warn every would be hero out there though. You're much more likely to shoot yourself or a family member than an intruder. You are also statistically not likely to hit the intruder when you fire. So I guess that falls in the delusional fantasy camp as well.
I do agree with you on those points. Zimmerman was wrong and negligent for his own safety and that of others when he pursued a lone individual in the night. Basic understanding of any animals is that when they feel threatened, they will become more threatening. The initial action led to a chain of events, compounded by the extremely poor decision of Martin to assault Zimmerman which was the proximate cause of Zimmermans self defence action which resulted in Martin's death. This could have been avoided so easily one would hope if everyone would rely less on machismo and more on "the lizard brain"Quote:
Originally Posted by Strike For The South
Guns are not a stop-measure for tyranny. Much better would be an educated, reasonably compassionate and engaged populace. With that type of a populace, guns are not as much of a threat either, so in a Utopia, guns are still not a bad thing.
+1 for properly cooking your meat.Quote:
Originally Posted by Philipvs Vallindervs Calicvla
Just to clarify, does medium rare count as properly cooked? Because that's how I order my steaks.
IIRC if it's still pink inside, there's a chance of parasite.
I just found a website that deals with the subject (Warning, contains potentially offensive language but also useful links): http://www.ihaveabrainparasite.com
Oh I remember that parasite. God damn it, I was really paranoid about it for a long time.
The wikipedia page suggests that you need to cook slabs of beef at least to medium in order to ensure it is safe. Thanks for scaring me again. Good thing I don't really eat meat unless I am at my parents house.
Well, even in the US where we love our red meat, it seems that there is relatively little risk that I am infected with the parasite.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/art...5979/table/T1/
At worst, there is a 16% chance I am infected. If I happen to be one of those 16%, that's just bad luck that I could not do anything about. I have been more or less vegetarian since I went off to college, I only eat meat when I go home. Obviously there was little say I had in the matter when I was young about eating whats on my plate.
Listen, I order my meat medium-well, because at every restaurant that means Medium. Over cooking increases you risk of gastrointestinal carcinoma, a hallmark of the nanny state. I'm gonna go into Manhattan, open carrying, while smoking a bowl, riding up and down an escalator for hours, eating rare meat and beef chugging a 90 ounce slurpee, in a thong. F thr state. Obviously not because I don't want to get arrested, but you can imagine what it it would be like if I did, right? No? Everybody on the bus.
Dude, it is 8am on the East Coast right now, how are you STILL drunk?Quote:
Originally Posted by ICantSpellDawg
The trick is to simply cut the meat into smaller pieces and then cook it until it's done, not black (which is what I'd call overcooked) but not raw anymore either. The smaller the pieces, the easier to do that. Noone forces you to to cook an entire animal in one piece, you cut or bite pieces off to eat it anyway.
Here's some positive news, via Gallup polling...
Fewer Blacks in U.S. See Bias in Jobs, Income, and Housing
The poll asked "On the average, blacks have worse jobs, income and housing than whites. Do you think this is mostly due to discrimination against blacks, or is it mostly due to something else?"
In 1993, the poll was almost even split. Now 37/60- with 60% sayings something other than discrimination is the main reason. The younger demographics are much more likely to say "something else" (30/68), while blacks 55+ are split (47/51).
To me, this is somewhat reassuring to see. Younger generations are less likely to blame discrimination- and this trend will probably continue. Maybe things are getting better, despite the best efforts of many civil rights leaders to convince them otherwise.