• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial[W:292]

Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

Yes, I have trained very carefully in order to use my 9mm in self-defense and I dont care HOW clear the threat or big an asshole....I will retreat every time if I can.

Case in point: Michael Dunn. Need another one? George Zimmerman. Doesnt matter that he got off....his life is ruined.

Very well said.

Though I am very infrequently armed- I just rarely feel the need, I am also firmly resolved to follow the Olde Common Law wisdom that required retreating if possible.

Even though Florida SYG eliminated the need (foolishly in my opinion- Common Law principals are based on centuries of learned common sense), as you pointed out, even legitimate defenses are just too costly (Zimmerman), and at least one jury was tired of the Michael Dunns of the world.

Far from it missy. And I don't give two ****s what your gun ownership resume is, the fact that your prevailing instinct is to retreat makes me wonder why you have one.
What? This makes no sense what so ever. There are alot of very sound reasons why someone would not want to be involved in an avoidable shooting.

Sweating bullets (get it) that a jury buys your side of the "I stood my ground- and needed to, absolutely needed to shoot "S" " is just one of many.

Then factor in that the Texas law states one cannot provoke the victim (yet does not define "provocation") and the odds of a jury not buying into a particular SYG claim go upwards.
 
Last edited:
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

Far from it missy. And I don't give two ****s what your gun ownership resume is, the fact that your prevailing instinct is to retreat makes me wonder why you have one. But its your own business I guess. I'll keep watch to see where you line up on 2nd amendment issues in the future.

By the by, you seem awfully quick to lump me in with your caricature of Dunn without ever having met me. That points more to your looking silly that your irrational outburst here.

So you'd rather start shooting than extricate yourself from the situation if at all possible? Otherwise, why have a gun, right?
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

Based on the evidence a jury of 12 saw fit to end his life as he knew it. He has 3, 60 year sentences for attempted murder plus a life sentence no parole. You just keep on defending him though.
How many times do you need to be told?
We know what the Jury decided. We do not know why. Do you or do you not understand that?
We also know that Juries get things wrong all the time. Do you or do you not understand that?

That is why this current discussion is about the evidence and not what they decided. Do you or do you not understand that?
Your continuing to bring it up is absurd.


Justice was served
:doh
By the evidence there was a miscarriage of justice.


and your argument still looks ignorant and racist,
You tell as many lies as you want but it doesn't change the truth that my arguments are based on the evidence which is not racist.
But you false clams of racism, is racist.


PS: I can't wait for the guy in Denver who shot blindly into his garage to get convicted. Then I can laugh at your lame brained justifications yet again.
Muhahahah!
You have no concept of the law or justice.
So you speak nonsense.
The only reason he would be convicted is because he verbally blew off steam in public.
Not because of the actual evidence of what happened. That being he heard a metal on metal noise increasing his fear to the point of being fearful for his life.






Why is it "logical" to accept Dunn's word for anything? His actions following the incident certainly don't make him seem trustworthy.
His actions afterwards seemed like exactly something that some folks would do considering the circumstances. They do not impart any dishonesty to his actions though. That is only from suspicious minds, not rational ones.

As for accepting? There is no evidence to show that is account is false. Nothing.





Lmao.

http://27.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lr2qfvGsSe1qfk87to1_500.gif[IMG][/QUOTE]:doh
Look at that. More nonsense from you because you can not debate the evidence.
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

Justice was served


yep thats all that needs said, there was much evidence that put him away including testimony from his own girl and he also got caught lying multiple times
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

As for accepting? There is no evidence to show that is account is false. Nothing.

I think the fact that the deceased didn't have the weapon Dunn claimed he did is evidence that his account is false.

There's no evidence to show that his account is true, either.
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

His actions afterwards seemed like exactly something that some folks would do considering the circumstances.

In what alternate universe do YOU live? If you blew someone away, the first thing you'd do is drive to a motel and order a ****ing pizza?
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

In what alternate universe do YOU live? If you blew someone away, the first thing you'd do is drive to a motel and order a ****ing pizza?
Can the idiotic hyperbole.
I see you haven't payed attention to the actual evidence.
He didn't know he blew anybody away.
He fled from the threat.
Only on the next morning did he learn of it.


I think the fact that the deceased didn't have the weapon Dunn claimed he did is evidence that his account is false.
Again showing you do not know the evidence.
That does not mean that a gun did not exist.
Nor does it mean that something that appeared to be a gun didn't exist. (Tripod leg being one such thing)

Davis friends left the scene by driving into an adjacent parking lot 400 feet away. They stop and got out. It was seen that they appeared to be looking for something in the vehicle and moving stuff around.
The driver instead of completing a call to 911, made two call in this paring lot to his aunt and his cousin, both who lived in the immediate area and who both came unto the scene in minutes.

The police didn't bother to search the area until several days later.
If Davis had a gun or something that appeared as such, they had more than ample opportunity to get rid of it and have it secreted away.
So it does leave the possibility that there was one.


There's no evidence to show that his account is true, either.
That is not how it works.
The prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he committed the crime, which includes showing that what he says didn't happen by the evidence. There was no evidence showing his account not to be true.
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

Can the idiotic hyperbole.
I see you haven't payed attention to the actual evidence.
He didn't know he blew anybody away.
He fled from the threat.
Only on the next morning did he learn of it.


Again showing you do not know the evidence.
That does not mean that a gun did not exist.
Nor does it mean that something that appeared to be a gun didn't exist. (Tripod leg being one such thing)

Davis friends left the scene by driving into an adjacent parking lot 400 feet away. They stop and got out. It was seen that they appeared to be looking for something in the vehicle and moving stuff around.
The driver instead of completing a call to 911, made two call in this paring lot to his aunt and his cousin, both who lived in the immediate area and who both came unto the scene in minutes.

The police didn't bother to search the area until several days later.
If Davis had a gun or something that appeared as such, they had more than ample opportunity to get rid of it and have it secreted away.
So it does leave the possibility that there was one.


That is not how it works.
The prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he committed the crime, which includes showing that what he says didn't happen by the evidence. There was no evidence showing his account not to be true.

Here is how it works.

You perceive a threat so incredible - so frightening and life threatening - that you discharge your weapon multiple times. Would a reasonable person not expect you to tell the police about the dangerous thugs you have encountered? The ones that threatened your very life?

Of course. that is what a reasonable person would do.

Now, in terms of them not finding a weapon. If there really was a weapon, the best chance in finding it was the day of the occurrence. His best chance at them finding the "weapon" was immediately after the incident. Now, whose fault was that? By fleeing the scene of the crime and not reporting in a reasonable manner the horrible danger her faced? Guess what ....his believability is in the crapper .
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

Here is how it works.
:doh
No that is just one way it works.


Of course. that is what a reasonable person would do.
:naughty
No, that is just one way a person may act.
What he did was also reasonable given the known circumstances, as already pointed out. Duh! :doh


Now, in terms of them not finding a weapon. If there really was a weapon, the best chance in finding it was the day of the occurrence. His best chance at them finding the "weapon" was immediately after the incident. Now, whose fault was that? By fleeing the scene of the crime and not reporting in a reasonable manner the horrible danger her faced? Guess what ....his believability is in the crapper .
Nothing you said here counters what I stated.
While you see it a a blame thing, it isn't.
The fact remains that both parties didn't say anything that would have lead the police to checking the area immediately.
And when they did it was several days after they were told.
That leaves the possibility that something was gotten rid of in the other parking lot, and the people Thompson called came and got it immediately.
Before cops even had a chance to contemplate looking in that area.
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

In what alternate universe do YOU live? If you blew someone away, the first thing you'd do is drive to a motel and order a ****ing pizza?

yep he is a nutcase that belongs in jail
no rational, sane person does what he does in his case AND ALSO LIES ABOUT IT lol

he is a loon and now in prison theres gona be some shots fired at him, the kind he wont like lol
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

yep he is a nutcase that belongs in jail
no rational, sane person does what he does in his case AND ALSO LIES ABOUT IT lol

he is a loon and now in prison theres gona be some shots fired at him, the kind he wont like lol
The facts and evidence proves you wrong in regards to what a sane person does.
Nor has any lie been proven. So you are talking nonsense.
And you have no idea what will happen to him.
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

1.)The facts and evidence proves you wrong in regards to what a sane person does.
2.)Nor has any lie been proven. So you are talking nonsense.
3.)nd you have no idea what will happen to him.

1.) false, thats an assumption and your opinion. Not fact or evidence.
2.) false, his lies were proven by the testimony of his girlfriend, phone records and the testimony of his neighbor.
3.) this is true, I dont know, but in my opinion its a safe bet and i find it hilarious! I hope it does!
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

Can the idiotic hyperbole.
I see you haven't payed attention to the actual evidence.
He didn't know he blew anybody away.
He fled from the threat.
Only on the next morning did he learn of it.


:lamo

So therefore, IYO, it is normal for a person to avoid going home, check into a hotel, order pizza and beer after unloading your weapon in a car full of people. So long as you don't know for sure that you killed someone.

Your spin is absurd. Stop being so absurd and learn the evidence and quit replacing evidence with your absurd opinions and then trying to conflate the two.
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

:naughty
No, that is just one way a person may act.
What he did was also reasonable given the known circumstances, as already pointed out. Duh! :doh.

No, it is pretty much the way any reasonable person would act.

I will bet you the fact that he FLED the scene and did not report the serious incident weighed heavily on the minds of jurors. As it should have.

It was entirely unreasonable for an innocent man to flee the scene after he had discharged his weapon 10 times towards other human beings.

It is entirely reasonable for a person wishing to evade criminal prosecution to flee the scene where he just discharged his weapon 10 times towards other human beings.
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

The facts and evidence proves you wrong in regards to what a sane person does.
1.) false, thats an assumption and your opinion. Not fact or evidence.
False. That was your opinion shown, and was shown to be absurdly false.
He has never been shown not to be sane. Nor was any attempt made to have any Doctor declare the nonsense you spout.


2.) false, his lies were proven by the testimony of his girlfriend, phone records and the testimony of his neighbor.
Your wrong opinion again
His GF not remembering does not make what he said a lie. Never will.
And his thinking that he carried through with what he intended, because he spoke with the very person he intended to contact, does not make what he said a lie.
It just means he was mistaken as he testified to. A mistake that anyone can make.





it is normal for a person to avoid going home, check into a hotel, order pizza and beer after unloading your weapon in a car full of people. So long as you don't know for sure that you killed someone.
???
1. There is no law that said he had to remain or report the incident.
2. He didn't know he killed the threat and was fleeing from that very threat. That is normal.
3. He ordered food for the GF. And even if it was for him, it isn't at all odd.

And the following clearly applies to you, the one who doesn't know the evidence. :doh
Your spin is absurd. Stop being so absurd and learn the evidence and quit replacing evidence with your absurd opinions and then trying to conflate the two.





No, it is pretty much the way any reasonable person would act.
:naughty
No, it is a way some people would act.

It is like you do not understand that everybody acts differently.


I will bet you the fact that he FLED the scene and did not report the serious incident weighed heavily on the minds of jurors. As it should have.
It may have, but it shouldn't have given the circumstances.
And if the the Juror from the first trial is an example of why this Jury found guilt, this has nothing to do with it.


It was entirely unreasonable for an innocent man to flee the scene after he had discharged his weapon 10 times towards other human beings.
:lamo No it isn't, especially considering that he had no idea if the threat was going to return and fire at him. Under such circumstances it is best to flee.


It is entirely reasonable for a person wishing to evade criminal prosecution to flee the scene where he just discharged his weapon 10 times towards other human beings.
This is nothing more than conditioned cynical thoughts.
It is more likely he fled for the reason he stated he did.
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

1.)False. That was your opinion shown, and was shown to be absurdly false.
He has never been shown not to be sane. Nor was any attempt made to have any Doctor declare the nonsense you spout.


Your wrong opinion again
His GF not remembering does not make what he said a lie. Never will.
And his thinking that he carried through with what he intended, because he spoke with the very person he intended to contact, does not make what he said a lie.
It just means he was mistaken.





???
1. There is no law that said he had to remain or report the incident.
2. He didn't know he killed the threat and was fleeing from that very threat. That is normal.
3. He ordered food for the GF. And deven if it was for him it isn't at all odd.

And the following clearly applies to you, the one who doesn't know the evidence. :doh
Your spin is absurd. Stop being so absurd and learn the evidence and quit replacing evidence with your absurd opinions and then trying to conflate the two.





:naughty
No, it is a way some people would act.

It is like you do not understand that everybody acts differently.


It may have, but it shouldn't have given the circumstances.
And if the the Juror from the first trial is an example of why this Jury found guilt, this has nothing to do with it.


:lamo No it isn't, especially considering that he had no idea if the threat was going to return and fire at him. Under such circumstances it is best to flee.


This is nothing more than conditioned cynical thoughts.
It is more likely he fled for the reason he stated he did.

1.) you just proved there was no facts or evidence declaring him to be sane or not sane proving me right and your statement wrong. I said I thought he was insane, you claimed FACTS and EVIDENCE prove otherwise thats false, thanks for proving me right.
2.) good thing no one talked about her not remembering, please stick to what was said, making stuff up wont change the facts. Two peoples testimonies and phones records showed he lied. This fact will never change. Until you produce facts that prove otherwise you have nothing and there will be no response. Its a fact he lied, this was proven in court.
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

1.) you just proved there was no facts or evidence declaring him to be sane or not sane proving me right and your statement wrong. I said I thought he was insane, you claimed FACTS and EVIDENCE prove otherwise thats false, thanks for proving me right.
What an absurdly dishonest response.
You did not say you "thought". You made declarative statements which are wrong, as no one, let alone you or a professional has shown any of that to be true.
You prove yourself wrong and are just deflecting with nonsense as usual.
Your initial, non-thought, declarative claims were:
1.) "he is a nutcase"
2.) "no rational, sane person does what he does in his case AND ALSO LIES ABOUT IT"
3.) he is a loon

The facts and the evidence prove you to be wrong, and you are just deflecting with nonsense as usual.


2.) good thing no one talked about her not remembering, please stick to what was said, making stuff up wont change the facts. Two peoples testimonies and phones records showed he lied. This fact will never change. Until you produce facts that prove otherwise you have nothing and there will be no response. Its a fact he lied, this was proven in court.
Wrong J. Nothing showed he lied.
Her, an emotional basket case not remembering, does not mean he lied.
Until such time as you have proof, you are being dishonest and making false claims.
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

And yet, he claims that his life was threatened, shot 10 rounds into a car filled with people, and drove 2 hours to his lodging, ordered pizza and a movie.

How again did the police track him down?
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

And yet, he claims that his life was threatened, shot 10 rounds into a car filled with people, and drove 2 hours to his lodging, ordered pizza and a movie.

How again did the police track him down?
The homeless man took down Dunn's license plate number as Dunn escaped the murder scene and gave it to the store clerk.
Had he not done so Dunn would likely still be on the run and we would never know who murdered Jordan Davis and who attempted to murder his three friends because their music was too loud..
Dunn was obviously on the run and showed no intention of ever reporting the murder to the police.
The racist murderer Dunn would have gone free.
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

Excon,

How again did the police track him down?

This should be interesting.
 
Last edited:
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

So you'd rather start shooting than extricate yourself from the situation if at all possible? Otherwise, why have a gun, right?

I didn't say that did I? But I am not going to run to my closet and cowar like a little girl either...Instead of always trying to make up what I say, why don't you actually address what I DO say?
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

The homeless man took down Dunn's license plate number as Dunn escaped the murder scene and gave it to the store clerk.

Good for him, people should always be aware.

Had he not done so Dunn would likely still be on the run and we would never know who murdered Jordan Davis and who attempted to murder his three friends because their music was too loud..

"Likely"??? and "we'd never know who murdered Jordan Davis"??? So, are you saying that forensics would have never identified who shot Davis? Do you think we live in the 30s or something? Also, it is important to note, that Dunn's story to police has always been that he thought he saw a weapon being produced in the Durango...

Dunn was obviously on the run and showed no intention of ever reporting the murder to the police.

Yep, he was absolutely wrong for not only leaving the scene of the gas station, but then wrong again for hearing it on the news, and leaving the hotel for home...That didn't look good for him, but could have been out of fear, instead of intent to flee...Only he knows for sure.

The racist murderer Dunn would have gone free.

I don't know if the man (Dunn) was racist or not, neither do you....
 
Re: Michael Dunn found guilty of 1st-degree murder in loud-music trial

I don't know if the man (Dunn) was racist or not, neither do you....

His letters from jail were pretty telling.
 
Back
Top Bottom