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

Jryan's philosophy meets Mad Max

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 do understand what you are saying, though you think I don't. I just completely disagree.

Click to expand...

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.

Have you noticed that you NEVER mention victims? Never. Why?

Click to expand...

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.

I look at from the victim's perspective. Why does the rapists rotten past allow mitigating what he did to her? She didn't make that past. What possible relevance is that to her? Nor is there any green-light that will flash on when the rapist is "cured," so the question is what right is there to - based upon guessing his subconscious being "fixed" - to expose more potential victims to him?

Click to expand...

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.

To the extent a person can be fixed, how is the fixing accomplished? How is bad behavior prevented? One way is fear of what will happen as a result.

Click to expand...

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.

I've addressed the problem of MANY bad behavior men towards women. Men increasingly harassing a woman for example. Without exception, given my reputation and known/proven abilities, if I told that man "you cut that s...t out or I'm going to break your collar bone" he would correct his behavior. And because of I and a few other men like me, the women were and felt safe. And no one, including him, was hurt. His behavior accordingly modified. If I instead approached saying, "it seems something is troubling you inside you, what is it?" I'd end up having to break his collar bone or worse to prevent him from continuing to try to hurt me figuring I'm just a wimp-ass.

Click to expand...

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.

It was FEAR that modified men's behavior away from misconduct they wished to do subconsciously. But, you know, as far as I'm concerned, they can violently rape that woman inside his mind and fantasy all he cares to. Think any damn thing he wants. I only cared what he does, not how he thinks or feels.

Click to expand...

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.

Is it FEAR or state-of-mind that prevents crime? Do kids not shoplift because of fear of getting caught? Or because they feel good about themselves? I think it is fear of getting caught. And I think it need be absolutely known that if a person ends up in court for a crime they can't use self-pity of their past as a defense.

Click to expand...

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.

A limitation on me in terms of violence against "evil men" has always been my sense of knowing where the line-of-law is (sic). I might push it to the max but I wouldn't just disregard it. I didn't beat some of those men to death because I felt good about myself. It is because I did not want to go to prison. I could defend within law breaking their bones and dislocating joints pushing "defensing others" or myself to the max, but not beating the person to death. So I didn't. Doesn't mean I didn't want to or even didn't believe doing so was the right thing to do.

Click to expand...

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)

joko104 said:

:lol:

Haven't seen you around for a while, maybe different threads.
I see hear alot of people do that, mostly women it seems. Which of them was more unfairly treated in the past, ie pity-contests. Sometimes it seems the whole country in involved it like the new national pasttime. Everyone psycho-analyzing themselves. Every problem someone else's fault.

Click to expand...

Terrible **** happens to everyone. As soon as you start making societal decisions out of pity instead of in rational pursuit of clear quantifiable objectives, your system is going to start falling apart.

Of course, you could say the same thing about making decisions out of bloodlust, too.

JohnWOlin said:

So let me just see if I get you right, a 14 year old kid comes up to you while your at a school with a concealed weapon because I dunno...your awesome? .

Click to expand...

What is a 14 year old kid doing on a college campus?

The kid has a bat and instead of I dunno grabbing a chair or something and pushing him away or rushing him, you shoot him in the face because this kid -could- be a black belt.

Click to expand...

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.

TurtleDude said:

too much college courses, not enough real life reality

Click to expand...

Right, to know the application of things you must know the theories TurtleDude.

As a lawyer I thought you would know though that being emotionally involved changes disables a person from being a witness, a juror, a clergy, or a lawyer (Although not sure about the last two). If you don't think free will has anything to do with the subject at hand then I suggest you reread my points on this thread. I say that the law should be amended to dictate that if someone is being raped, and no one is in danger of being physically/mentally altered (The woman is already mentally/physically altered seeing as how she is already raped), then the person with the gun pointing at the bad guy should say, "Stop it!", if they don't or they make any move to run/hurt someone, shoot... Most would say the monster deserves to be shot anyways. That is why I'm arguing that sense free will does not exist, we cannot punish these people because they are in a sense, "A victim of society".

Viktyr Korimir said:

Terrible **** happens to everyone. As soon as you start making societal decisions out of pity instead of in rational pursuit of clear quantifiable objectives, your system is going to start falling apart.

Of course, you could say the same thing about making decisions out of bloodlust, too.

Click to expand...

Isn't justice a form of bloodlust though?

Jryan said:

As I have already apologized for my statements and retracted my statements on the subject, I will do so again. I'm sorry I said rape is not a violent crime.

Click to expand...

It's cool man. I think you did what a lot of us do and got caught up in reply and weren't really anaylzing EVERY word you wrote down before you say it. It's hard to do that and I have to stop myself in some threads and usually take a few days before I reply again.

Jryan said:

Right, to know the application of things you must know the theories TurtleDude.

As a lawyer I thought you would know though that being emotionally involved changes disables a person from being a witness, a juror, a clergy, or a lawyer (Although not sure about the last two). If you don't think free will has anything to do with the subject at hand then I suggest you reread my points on this thread. I say that the law should be amended to dictate that if someone is being raped, and no one is in danger of being physically/mentally altered (The woman is already mentally/physically altered seeing as how she is already raped), then the person with the gun pointing at the bad guy should say, "Stop it!", if they don't or they make any move to run/hurt someone, shoot... Most would say the monster deserves to be shot anyways. That is why I'm arguing that sense free will does not exist, we cannot punish these people because they are in a sense, "A victim of society".

Click to expand...

why do you say stuff to me as if I need education in a field you know nothing about?

shoot someone in self defense as I have, spend 6 hours in front of a grand jury, then 8 more hours testifying at trials, then spend 300 hours lecturing police recruits and armed citizens about the matter and then get back to me. Oh try a few felony assault cases as well.

stonewall50 said:

It's cool man. I think you did what a lot of us do and got caught up in reply and weren't really anaylzing EVERY word you wrote down before you say it. It's hard to do that and I have to stop myself in some threads and usually take a few days before I reply again.

Click to expand...

Yeah, sometimes I will be like halfway through a reply and then realize, "WTF am I writing." lol, sucks though when you hit that post button and someone responds, or in this case the entire DP community, you then go nuts and stick to your crazy guns. Oh well, that is what it is like to be human.

"To err is human, to forgive is divine."

TurtleDude said:

why do you say stuff to me as if I need education in a field you know nothing about?

shoot someone in self defense as I have, spend 6 hours in front of a grand jury, then 8 more hours testifying at trials, then spend 300 hours lecturing police recruits and armed citizens about the matter and then get back to me. Oh try a few felony assault cases as well.

Click to expand...

So lawyers are all knowing because of their experience?

BTW, shooting someone in self defense only makes you emotionally involved...

Jryan said:

Isn't justice a form of bloodlust though?

Click to expand...

Then eating must be a form of murder...

Ockham said:

Then eating must be a form of murder...

Click to expand...

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?

Jryan said:

Seeking vengeance is also known as bloodlust.

Click to expand...

And in order for humans to eat, some plant or animal must die.

Jryan said:

Some would argue that people only want justice to seek revenge, see how I arrived to that conclusion.

Click to expand...

Revenge does not equal bloodlust, nor is it a synonym for justice, or law. You're conclusion is unfounded.

Jryan said:

Now how is eating a form of murder?

Click to expand...

See above.

Revenge does not equal bloodlust, nor is it a synonym for justice, or law. You're conclusion is unfounded.

Click to expand...

Meh, I guess you are right, my bad.

I lust over the blood of the carrot! Yank that carrot, spill it's orange blood. I must eat! Arggg.....

Jryan said:

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)

Click to expand...

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."

joko104 said:

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."

Click to expand...

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.

stonewall50 said:

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.

Click to expand...

You have time to post this but you still have not addressed this...http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls/122610-florida-law-use-deadly-force-17.html#post1060367847

I will take your silence as admitting you had no idea of what you were talking about..

Blackdog said:

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/122610-florida-law-use-deadly-force-11.html#post1060365123

Click to expand...

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.)

Jryan said:

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.)

Click to expand...

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.

Blackdog said:

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.

Click to expand...

I was in his shoes on another thread...

Jryan said:

Okay, so lets start with the small heinous crime. Were their other factors when they decided to try pot for the first time? Were they being influenced by any other outside behavior? While I agree that they shouldn't of started off with arson/kidnapping/murder, where did this idea come from? I mean how maddening would it be if you just suddenly got the brilliant idea to call up your friend and tell him about a home intrusion you would want to do. This, I think, paints more of a picture that our thoughts/actions are random and should be surprising even to us.

Click to expand...

Well, I can answer that.

Let's start with a person I grew up w/ and know very well, I'll call him M.

M had been raised in a middle-class Christian home to very conventional parents and traditional values and practices. In his early years he was a gentle child and liked to read.

At the age of 13, M started going to a Jr High School that was literally awash in drugs and violence (the same one I went to). His parents were unaware how bad it was, and had trouble believing it even when told. Over the next three years M became hardened to violence but struggled with depression and anger. He began to practice violence on others somewhat indiscriminately... anyone who annoyed him sufficiently was liable to be beaten viciously. He started carrying weapons, knives and guns. His view of the world changed and he began to see it as a vile place where the strong took and the weak suffered.

He started doing drugs.

When he was 16 his classmates might have voted him "most likely to spend the majority of his life in prison". He was barely sane. His career ambitions included assassin for either the Mafia or the CIA. He studied the art of stealthy murder like it was a science. He began to commit petty theft; his new circle of friends began to disappear into the Juvenile system for armed robbery and drug dealing.

Then M met a nice girl and fell in love. For a couple of years he seemed to be doing better; he quit doing drugs and mostly stayed out of trouble, and began to consider career options that didn't involve homicide.

By the time he was 20 the girl left him for someone more stable, and he relapsed. He went back to drugs and booze and made elaborate plans to involve himself in gambling rackets and hook up with the Mob.

He says that through all of this his conscience nagged him. He'd been brought up better; he knew better; he didn't like himself very much.

Struggling to determine who he was, M got a regular job and started back going to church, occasionally. One day, he says, he had an ephiphany and saw his life, on its current course, as the empty and barren thing that it was, bringing misery to self and others and ending in destruction. He repented and accepted Jesus as his Lord, turned his back on the darkness and vowed to live for God and do good hereafter.

That was something over twenty years ago. To my knowlege, M has been sober and drug free, and remained a productive and law-abiding citizen in all the years since.

Had it been otherwise, he probably would have made the news one day, and not in a good way either.


This is one example I could give, of dozens and dozens. Many of the others lack a happy ending.

In these many anecdotes I could expound on, I see intellectual processes and choices made, not will-less determinism. I see gradual progression followed by sharp upturns or downturns as critical decision points are reached, not random actions dictated by the subconscious.

Jryan said:

I was in his shoes on another thread...

Click to expand...

Not really the same. You did not try to present yourself as some kind of expert...

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.

You also made efforts to correct yourself when it was pointed out. He has ignored it completely.

Goshin said:

Well, I can answer that.

Let's start with a person I grew up and know very well, I'll call him M.

M had been raised in a middle-class Christian home to very conventional parents and traditional values and practices. In his early years he was a gentle child and liked to read.

At the age of 13, M started going to a Jr High School that was literally awash in drugs and violence (the same one I went to). His parents were unaware how bad it was, and had trouble believing it even when told. Over the next three years M became hardened to violence but struggled with depression and anger. He began to practice violence on others somewhat indiscriminately... anyone who annoyed him sufficiently was liable to be beaten viciously. He started carrying weapons, knives and guns. His view of the world changed and he began to see it as a vile place where the strong took and the weak suffered.

He started doing drugs.

When he was 16 his classmates might have voted him "most likely to spend the majority of his life in prison". He was barely sane. His career ambitions included assassin for either the Mafia or the CIA. He studied the art of stealthy murder like it was a science. He began to commit petty theft; his new circle of friends began to disappear into the Juvenile system for armed robbery and drug dealing.

Then M met a nice girl and fell in love. For a couple of years he seemed to be doing better; he quit doing drugs and mostly stayed out of trouble, and began to consider career options that didn't involve homicide.

By the time he was 20 the girl left him for someone more stable, and he relapsed. He went back to drugs and booze and made elaborate plans to involve himself in gambling rackets and hook up with the Mob.

He says that through all of this his conscience nagged him. He'd been brought up better; he knew better; he didn't like himself very much.

Struggling to determine who he was, M got a regular job and started back going to church, occasionally. One day, he says, he had an ephiphany and saw his life, on its current course, as the empty and barren thing that it was, bringing misery to self and others and ending in destruction. He repented and accepted Jesus as his Lord, turned his back on the darkness and vowed to live for God and do good hereafter.

That was something over twenty years ago. To my knowlege, M has been sober and drug free, and remained a productive and law-abiding citizen in all the years since.

Had it been otherwise, he probably would have made the news one day, and not in a good way either.


This is one example I could give, of dozens and dozens. Many of the others lack a happy ending.

In these many anecdotes I could expound on, I see intellectual processes and choices made, not will-less determinism. I see gradual progression followed by sharp upturns or downturns as critical decision points are reached, not random actions dictated by the subconscious.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry if you had to witness that Goshin. It must be painful to witness anyone doing that.

Well, I see it as he had a conflict of interest and luckily the one that was his salvation won. Like I said, maybe their is room for free will, but a lot of it has to be involved with the lack of it.

Jryan said:

Isn't justice a form of bloodlust though?

Click to expand...

No. Justice is the application of one force against another equal force. It's a balancing of the scales, or karma, or whatever you wish to call equalizing the balance of events. Since you seem to think you are a philosopher, this would be a good question for you to pose to yourself.