View Poll Results: Do you agree with Florida Law on use of deadly force?

Voters
67. You may not vote on this poll
  • Agree

    48 71.64%
  • Disagree

    16 23.88%
  • I oppose the Second Amendment completely

    2 2.99%
  • There should be no rule of law

    1 1.49%
Page 27 of 45 FirstFirst ... 17252627282937 ... LastLast
Results 261 to 270 of 446

Thread: Florida Law on use of deadly force [W:390]

  1. #261
    Noblesse oblige
    Ockham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    01-27-17 @ 07:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,909
    Blog Entries
    4

    re: Florida Law on use of deadly force [W:390]

    Quote Originally Posted by Jryan View Post
    Isn't justice a form of bloodlust though?
    Then eating must be a form of murder...
    I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on whats being proposed here, hed agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute. - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.


  2. #262
    Guru
    Jryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Last Seen
    01-12-16 @ 09:07 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    2,987
    Blog Entries
    1

    re: Florida Law on use of deadly force [W:390]

    Quote Originally Posted by Ockham View Post
    Then eating must be a form of murder...
    Seeking vengeance is also known as bloodlust. Some would argue that people only want justice to seek revenge, see how I arrived to that conclusion.

    Now how is eating a form of murder?
    I'm coming to see that no matter what law we regulate, be it the stand your ground act, there is never an objective morally right answer to any morale question; in fact, since there are multiple objectively right answers to every moral question that leaves us with a lot of grey area and a lot of black area (not in the racial since).
    -Jryan

  3. #263
    Noblesse oblige
    Ockham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New Jersey
    Last Seen
    01-27-17 @ 07:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    23,909
    Blog Entries
    4

    re: Florida Law on use of deadly force [W:390]

    Quote Originally Posted by Jryan View Post
    Seeking vengeance is also known as bloodlust.
    And in order for humans to eat, some plant or animal must die.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jryan View Post
    Some would argue that people only want justice to seek revenge, see how I arrived to that conclusion.
    Revenge does not equal bloodlust, nor is it a synonym for justice, or law. You're conclusion is unfounded.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jryan View Post
    Now how is eating a form of murder?
    See above.
    I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on whats being proposed here, hed agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute. - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.


  4. #264
    Guru
    Jryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Last Seen
    01-12-16 @ 09:07 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    2,987
    Blog Entries
    1

    re: Florida Law on use of deadly force [W:390]

    Revenge does not equal bloodlust, nor is it a synonym for justice, or law. You're conclusion is unfounded.
    Meh, I guess you are right, my bad.
    I'm coming to see that no matter what law we regulate, be it the stand your ground act, there is never an objective morally right answer to any morale question; in fact, since there are multiple objectively right answers to every moral question that leaves us with a lot of grey area and a lot of black area (not in the racial since).
    -Jryan

  5. #265
    Sage
    Dittohead not!'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Golden State
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    41,505

    re: Florida Law on use of deadly force [W:390]

    I lust over the blood of the carrot! Yank that carrot, spill it's orange blood. I must eat! Arggg.....
    "Donald Trump is a phony, a fraud... [he's] playing the American public for suckers." Mitt Romney

  6. #266
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    12-03-17 @ 03:32 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,568
    Blog Entries
    2

    re: Florida Law on use of deadly force [W:390]

    Quote Originally Posted by Jryan View Post
    BTW, I would like to start out by saying I appreciate your patience joko. I know it is frustrating when someone doesn't "get" what you are saying. I'm in your same boat though, just on the other side. Thank you for leaving out emotional responses. I try to do the same for you. Anyways...

    I think that we are on the same page. I understand what you are saying too, it is just that I disagree completely also, and by that understand what you are saying completely, I mean that in no disrespectful way.

    I do care for the victim, and I feel that luck was not on their side that day. This though, I think goes without saying.

    That is why it is unlawful for the person to do his crime. That is the logic behind the reason we made these laws in the first place because fairness is ultimately our objective goal because fairness represents a maximized well being in a legal sense.
    For your last question, no, we don't expose more victims to this monster. That is why, and I assume we are talking about rape still, we would remove said individual from society because we cannot allow him to run amuck.

    Not trying to strawman your argument here, but I think this needs to be addressed on my part. I believe that people that commit these crimes are sick, diseased people that need mental help. They never understood right and wrong for the out because their parents were crack heads (substitute any other thing that a druggie/criminal might find more important than their kids here). I think through philosophy they can see their rights and their wrongs. For instance, in the case with Hayes' partner, later he learned of the murder of the children and has since attempted suicide and feels really bad about what he did to that family. Does this make him a better person than he is? Of course. Do I feel he has earned his right to re-enter society. I don't know because what if he is lying. That is a game of Russian rolet that with some criminals I'm not willing to bet.

    Right, but the problem here is that in the moment the assailant isn't thinking about the consequences. He is thinking about his reward. Although I must admit, I have no idea what a man like Hayes' partner was thinking when he committed those actions, and I can speculate that you don't either, but we do know that he never thought to release those children.

    Well sort of, intention has everything to do with a subject. If my intention in a defense situation, like the ones this law is about, is to save someone's innocent life by taking a soon to be guilty man's, then the difference between the two is the innocent was intending innocence, they never intended to be violent. The shooter is intending to cause harm and chaos, albeit subconsciously or consciously.

    I think that a kid sitting at home doesn't shop lift because they don't want to get in trouble. What about a kid that is intending to shoplift, in the heat of the moment I doubt the thought of what is to come has entered his mind. Although, developmentally children do not have this amount of logic so I doubt any of this enters a shoplifting child's mind.

    Right, the problem is, is that in hindsight you are justifying your cause, but in the moment, I highly doubt any thoughts of prison entered into your conscious thought; rather, your fight or flight response kicked in and told you to stop. Did it, in the moment that is, ever "occur to you" that what you were doing would send you to prison if you continued, of course not. Your conscious thought was more devoted to defending someone or dodging that next punch.
    I would like to add here though I think we have the same "intentions" as far as morals go. Neither of us wants evil to prevail in our world, but I think that we look at it differently and mine poses a limitation on that law. Like I said, the absence of free will doesn't change much about how we view the world, hell the free will theory even has room for the soul. I can't directly communicate with my soul, it is located in a subconscious area of my brain. Does this mean that it doesn't exist? Of course not.
    (Sorry for taking so long to respond, didn't see the post until like an hour or two later)
    I can respect the sincerity and thoughtfulness of what you posted. Srly. Thank you. Got me thinking. My head's pretty thick.

    In a way, I’m not the best example in some ways. The circumstances to untypical. Actually, yes I did calculate how far I can go or should go. Generally, my motive – maybe hard to believe – was to “disable” the person so to not be able to harm anyone, nor I and in a way even himself being more seriously hurt. Usually my action was not punitive, only preventative, though it likely seemed punitive to him.

    Avoiding prison was a very deliberate consideration and I very positively had sought very skilled legal advice on law, practical aspects of it, exact words to say to police etc. Only a few times my actions went beyond just preventing violence via violence in the sense of punishment or rage. Maybe twice. It also doesn’t work to use myself too much as it was a very violent environment in general and my role (literally job) was to keep it in check.

    You are right, though, that I do think may people engaging in serious criminal activity, particularly violence, ONCE THEY START do not consider punishment if caught. They do not think they will get caught or at the time that thought never crosses their mind.

    I agree people are much made by their pasts too. Obviously I would not have my natures but for my past. Your past, speculating, like has little abuse or violence in it, which also affects your priorities and perspectives.

    So I certainly agree to try to get ahead of the curve by preventing those things that lead a person down the wrong past or screw up their heads – child abuse, neglect, lack of education – or inappropriate education if a slow learner/low IQ … the list is long. Probably where we disagree is after-the-fact. We both agree to try to stop, prevent, help heal etc such negatives in a person’s life. The question is what about after they do the crime? Then what?

    Maybe it’s a ying-yang thing, carrot and stick. Maybe it takes both our perspectives. Both our ways.

    You’re the carrot. You hold out advancing into the good things, peace of mind, and internal harmony etc. One reason a person on the wrong path should follow your way is for the goodness it brings that person. But another reason is also the stick – the bad stuff that happens to them – not just others – if they don’t. The “stick” of punishment.

    Thinking back, that is sorta how it worked at the club – and why essentially everyone – despite so many violent personality men – wanted the “law and order” of non-violence. Why such very violent natured men would join to mostly a collective opposition to violence there. On the one hand, if they got out of line they got hurt, violently. Thrown out. Lots of pain. Humiliated in losing the fight. A trip to the hospital. And if it happened he had outstanding warrants he was ducking (not uncommon for men there), arrested at the hospital too. Not much fun in all that. BUT if he didn’t act badly, he got to stay, the beautiful women came, he’d have a good time and odds on get laid that night too.

    I don’t know if you see this as a semi-agreement. It just might take both our perspectives for this beehive of humanity to work as a society. That such a person really should listen to such as those of your view, accept help, sort thru it, work it out. Because if they do they truly will have a better life and more peace. BUT, if he absolutely won’t, then the flip side is sooner or later he may come across someone with the attitude like mine and ability to back it up – whether that be a judge in a court or someone like me on the street. And it might depend what hat we each are wearing as to what our role in this is.

    Crime-in-progress and those I would describe as known mad-dogs raise other questions of course.

    I've got to call it a day, but I've enjoyed this and it part of my learning. I do try to listen and to learn. What is just the-way-things-are both generally and in fine-detail because they grew up that way doesn't apply with me. It's an ongoing learning curve and I can really screw it up sometimes - not even realizing I'm doing so.
    I don't put myself into movie character roles but in an analous sense only, emotionally I'm still a bit like the fella holding the 9mm at the end of the Pulp fiction scene. The level of power those two men had in relation to each other. My trying to somehow sort things out too.
    Pulp Fiction Ending Scene (Diner) - YouTube
    How many violent men who thought they were tough found out how mistaken they were for which every bone and join in their body, their life, was entirely up to my decisions suddenly at that moment and they were completely powerless at my mercy - for which I had little to none? No, I didn't use weapons, though sometimes he would have one at the start. Nor am I trying to glamorize any of this.
    I came into fully civilized society of "nice" and "good" people only about 4 years ago. It is a far better way of life, though some aspects I don't care for. Sometimes the people seem naive, cowardly and too much "sheeple" rather than people. Still, it is my society and they are my people now. So "I'm trying. I'm trying real hard."
    Last edited by joko104; 04-06-12 at 05:24 PM.

  7. #267
    Guru
    Jryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Last Seen
    01-12-16 @ 09:07 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    2,987
    Blog Entries
    1

    re: Florida Law on use of deadly force [W:390]

    Quote Originally Posted by joko104 View Post
    I can respect the sincerity and thoughtfulness of what you posted. Srly. Thank you. Got me thinking. My head's pretty thick.

    In a way, I’m not the best explain in some ways. Actually, yes I did calculate how far I can go or should go. Generally, my motive – maybe hard to believe – was to “disable” the person so to not be able to harm anyone, nor I and in a way even himself being more seriously hurt. Usually my action was not punitive, only preventative, though it likely seemed punitive to him.

    Avoiding prison was a very deliberate consideration and I very positively had sought very skilled legal advice on law, practical aspects of it, exact words to say to police etc. Only a few times my actions went beyond just preventing violence via violence in the sense of punishment or rage. Maybe twice. It also doesn’t work to use myself too much as it was a very violent environment in general and my role (literally job) was to keep it in check.

    You are right, though, that I do think may people engaging in serious criminal activity, particularly violence, ONCE THEY START do not consider punishment if caught. They do not think they will get caught or at the time that thought never crosses their mind.

    I agree people are much made by their pasts too. Obviously I would not have my natures but for my past. Your past, speculating, like has little abuse or violence in it, which also affects your priorities and perspectives.

    So I certainly agree to try to get ahead of the curve by preventing those things that lead a person down the wrong past or screw up their heads – child abuse, neglect, lack of education – or inappropriate education if a slow learner/low IQ … the list is long. Probably where we disagree is after-the-fact. We both agree to try to stop, prevent, help heal etc such negatives in a person’s life. The question is what about after they do the crime? Then what?

    Maybe it’s a ying-yang thing, carrot and stick. Maybe it takes both our perspectives. Both our ways.

    You’re the carrot. You hold out advancing into the good things, peace of mind, and internal harmony etc. One reason a person on the wrong path should follow your way is for the goodness it brings that person. But another reason is also the stick – the bad stuff that happens to them – not just others – if they don’t. The “stick” of punishment.

    Thinking back, that is sorta how it worked at the club – and why essentially everyone – despite so many violent personality men – wanted the “law and order” of non-violence. Why such very violent natured men would join to mostly a collective opposition to violence there. On the one hand, if they got out of line they got hurt, violently. Thrown out. Lots of pain. Humiliated in losing the fight. A trip to the hospital. And if it happened he had outstanding warrants he was ducking (not uncommon for men there), arrested at the hospital too. Not much fun in all that. BUT if he didn’t act badly, he got to stay, the beautiful women came, he’d have a good time and odds on get laid that night too.

    I don’t know if you see this as a semi-agreement. It just might take both our perspectives for this beehive of humanity to work as a society. That such a person really should listen to such as those of your view, accept help, sort thru it, work it out. Because if they do they truly will have a better life and more peace. BUT, if he absolutely won’t, then the flip side is sooner or later he may come across someone with the attitude like mine and ability to back it up – whether that be a judge in a court or someone like me on the street. And it might depend what hat we each are wearing as to what our role in this is.

    Crime-in-progress and those I would describe as known mad-dogs raise other questions of course.

    I've got to call it a day, but I've enjoyed this and it part of my learning. I do try to listen and to learn. What is just the-way-things-are both generally and in fine-detail because they grew up that way doesn't apply with me. It's an ongoing learning curve and I can really screw it up sometimes - not even realizing I'm doing so.
    I don't put myself into movie character roles but in an analous sense only, emotionally I'm still a bit like the fella holding the 9mm at the end of the Pulp fiction scene. The level of power those two men had in relation to each other. My trying to somehow sort things out too.
    Pulp Fiction Ending Scene (Diner) - YouTube
    How many violent men who thought they were tough found out how mistaken they were for which every bone and join in their body, their life, was entirely up to my decisions suddenly at that moment and they were completely powerless at my mercy - for which I had little?
    I came into fully civilized society of "nice" and "good" people only about 4 years ago. It is a far better way of life, though some aspects I don't care for. Sometimes the people seem naive, cowardly and too much "sheeple" rather than people. Still, it is my society and they are my people now. So "I'm trying. I'm trying real hard."
    Maybe you are right that in the moment all free will is gone, your conscious has to be devoted to other things. IE in a fight you aren't thinking about where you will be eating dinner tonight, you are thinking about not getting thwacked in the head, and then when you are, say at home typing on DP , you are somewhat in control of your will or your conscious thought.

    Hehe, I was also gonna say last post, was just waiting for your response. I also appreciate you pointing these things out to me as now I can adjust my philosophy. The question that arises here though is when are we in control of our conscious/behaviors and when aren't we? The only one I can be 100% certain of sitting here at my computer is when we sleep.
    I'm coming to see that no matter what law we regulate, be it the stand your ground act, there is never an objective morally right answer to any morale question; in fact, since there are multiple objectively right answers to every moral question that leaves us with a lot of grey area and a lot of black area (not in the racial since).
    -Jryan

  8. #268
    King Of The Dog Pound
    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    34,489

    re: Florida Law on use of deadly force [W:390]

    Quote Originally Posted by stonewall50 View Post
    What is a 14 year old kid doing on a college campus?



    Why does this kid have a baseball bat on a college campus?

    And why would I shoot him unless he starts swinging it at me and I truly feel threatened?

    Articles about Baseball Bat - CNN

    I'm not really afraid of a baseball bat. Really guns either. Knives scare the **** out of me though. Something tells me by the way you talked about how to react to a baseball bat that you have no idea how to handle stick/bat defense. You know that you have 2 options right? Get inside the barrel of the bat (the deadliest part of the swing because it moves the fastest), or stay outside the range. And you clearly grew up in a suburb or something. We follow a different code where I grew up (there was MS13, Crips, and a whole host of other gangs, including the white supremacist jackasses): you can fight fair or you can win. I choose to win.

    You have time to post this but you still have not addressed this...http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/...post1060367847

    I will take your silence as admitting you had no idea of what you were talking about..
    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    Benjii likes the protests...he'd be largely irrelevant without them. So he needs to speak where he knows there will be protests against him and that makes him responsible for the protests.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

  9. #269
    Guru
    Jryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Last Seen
    01-12-16 @ 09:07 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    2,987
    Blog Entries
    1

    re: Florida Law on use of deadly force [W:390]

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post
    You don't even understand how the Castle law and the stand your ground laws work, let alone when they no longer apply.

    Here let me refresh your memory since you forgot...

    As a Resident of the State of Florida for my ENTIRE life, a Gun Owner, A Concealed Weapon Permit Owner, and as a Citizen of the United States I 100% agree with the Florida law.

    I also live in Florida. I am a certified in the state of Florida as a Security officer and I have my CCW.

    The Castle law removes the "duty to retreat" if you are attacked or someone enters your home, car, place of work or business criminally. Like breaking in through a window. The Stand Your Ground law covers everything else.The stand your ground law just like the castle law does not specify any need to retreat at all from a place you can legally be, period.

    You can see the actual laws here:

    Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine

    The entire trayvon thing going on...was CLEARLY a violation of Florida law. There is a duty to retreat when that is an option, and standing your ground is only allowed when you cannot retreat (as in into your vehicle, your home). What happened to Trayvon was a disgrace because the man pursued Trayvon. Not to mention Zimmerman should not be allowed to have a gun because of his criminal record.

    Anyway. The Florida law is GREAT.


    If Zimmerman was indeed attacked while returning to his car, he is not guilty at all. He had just as much right to be there as Treyvon, and if Treyvon attacked him was under no obligation to retreat under the law. It is still not illegal to follow someone on the sidewalk as far as the law goes. So even if Zimmer was following Treyvon, he should not have been attacked.

    As for his criminal record. Only 3 things can stop you from owning a gun in Florida. Being forcibly committed into a mental institution. Being convicted of a felony or crime of domestic violence even if a misdemeanor.

    PS Zimmer does not appear to have anything on his record that would disqualify him from owning a firearm.

    Have time to respond now?

    Are going to sit here and tell me it no longer applies? Go read the law and answer my fist post. I mite at that point take you seriously. You obviously for all your bragging don't know anything about the law, situation or how it applies.

    Here is the link to my post to you: http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/...post1060365123
    I would like to point out that their is the other option in which Zimmer attacked Trayvon. (Not taking sides, just pointing this out. I have come to the conclusion that we don't have all the facts, or at least enough facts for me to draw a conclusion.)
    I'm coming to see that no matter what law we regulate, be it the stand your ground act, there is never an objective morally right answer to any morale question; in fact, since there are multiple objectively right answers to every moral question that leaves us with a lot of grey area and a lot of black area (not in the racial since).
    -Jryan

  10. #270
    King Of The Dog Pound
    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    34,489

    re: Florida Law on use of deadly force [W:390]

    Quote Originally Posted by Jryan View Post
    I would like to point out that their is the other option in which Zimmer attacked Trayvon. (Not taking sides, just pointing this out. I have come to the conclusion that we don't have all the facts, or at least enough facts for me to draw a conclusion.)
    I absolutely agree. I have been saying from the beginning we don't have enough facts to decide anything.

    Stonewall on the other hand gives wrong information about the laws and situation and has no idea what he is talking either way as I have pointed out. And yet he is ready to have Zimmers rights taken away based on his own ignorance and misunderstanding of law etc.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    Benjii likes the protests...he'd be largely irrelevant without them. So he needs to speak where he knows there will be protests against him and that makes him responsible for the protests.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

Page 27 of 45 FirstFirst ... 17252627282937 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •