What's new
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

The Houston-area stand-your-ground-ish murder trial just concluded with a guilty verdict.
 
Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

I learned the best way to take over the world is to use spies to bribe cities from Civ 1. You also get a free tech that way.

Civ 2: Spy enters, plants nuke, detonates, paratroopers seize radioactive ruins.
 
Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

The Houston-area stand-your-ground-ish murder trial just concluded with a guilty verdict.

Thankfully there was video and many eye witnesses. But even in the best case scenario where justice didn't fail, it appears SYG made murder an option because the guy thought he could get off on SYG:

In a 22-minute video he recorded the night of the shooting, Rodriguez can be heard telling a police dispatcher "my life is in danger now" and "these people are going to go try and kill me." He then said "I'm standing my ground here," and shot Danaher after somebody appeared to grab his camera. The two other men were wounded.
 
Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

THAT's what you get from that trial? From a murder conviction? In MFing TEXAS.

rofl. That's grand.

Great...the guy who can never defend his posts.

How would you interpret him telling everyone that he was 'standing his ground' before shooting the guy?
 
Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

Great...the guy who can never defend his posts.

How would you interpret him telling everyone that he was 'standing his ground' before shooting the guy?

How would you interpret TEXAS convicting the guy on a MURDER charge? Again. Texas. Gun. Murder. The state that probably has the most lax gun laws in the nation.
 
Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

How would you interpret TEXAS convicting the guy on a MURDER charge? Again. Texas. Gun. Murder. The state that probably has the most lax gun laws in the nation.
Dang. I thought that was us here in Arizona. We better get Jan Brewer on the horn and loosen up those gun laws some more!
 
Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

How would you interpret TEXAS convicting the guy on a MURDER charge? Again. Texas. Gun. Murder. The state that probably has the most lax gun laws in the nation.

You questioned my 'it appears SYG made murder an option because the guy thought he could get off on SYG' statement.

The guy specifically said 'my life is in danger, I'm going to stand my ground'...and then shot the guy. The existance of SYG encouraged murder. Period. I don't care about whatever other point you want to divert this to...
 
Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

You questioned my 'it appears SYG made murder an option because the guy thought he could get off on SYG' statement.

The guy specifically said 'my life is in danger, I'm going to stand my ground'...and then shot the guy. The existance of SYG encouraged murder. Period. I don't care about whatever other point you want to divert this to...
I would opine that SYG is bad until your own life or the life of a loved one is in danger. Then its the most wonderful thing in the world since sliced bread.
 
Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

You questioned my 'it appears SYG made murder an option because the guy thought he could get off on SYG' statement.

The guy specifically said 'my life is in danger, I'm going to stand my ground'...and then shot the guy. The existance of SYG encouraged murder. Period. I don't care about whatever other point you want to divert this to...

And if he said "I have to do this to get a high score on Grand Theft Auto", you'd be crusading for alongside Jack Thompson to ban all video games, right? Maybe if he said "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live" you could start burning Harry Potter books. What a ****ing stupid argument you're trying to make.
 
Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

And if he said "I have to do this to get a high score on Grand Theft Auto", you'd be crusading for alongside Jack Thompson to ban all video games, right?

Ummm. Not even close to the argument I'm making. I have no problem with Grand Theft Auto, D&D or Saw movies. If those are the cause of a murder...said murderer knows he will get punished by the legal system. I just happen to think justice is a deterent to murder.

A bad law makes a would-be murder believe they can get off free...its no wonder why he said 'I'm standing my ground here' before killing the guy.
 
Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

You questioned my 'it appears SYG made murder an option because the guy thought he could get off on SYG' statement.

The guy specifically said 'my life is in danger, I'm going to stand my ground'...and then shot the guy. The existance of SYG encouraged murder. Period. I don't care about whatever other point you want to divert this to...
The way it sounds to me was he was going to murder the guy anyway. He was just trying to make it seem like it was because of stand your ground so he could get away with it.
 
Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

...

Mother+of+god+_0e29a0446d96d138e7f1b06aa63261cf.jpg
 
Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

I would opine that SYG is bad until your own life or the life of a loved one is in danger. Then its the most wonderful thing in the world since sliced bread.
If you have a weapon and the life of a loved one is in danger and you don't use your weapon because there's no SYG law, then I'm really glad I'm not your loved one.

The law has nothing to do with self-defense. It's a political wedge deliberately used to provoke an emotional response.
 
Last edited:
Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

If you have a weapon and the life of a loved one is in danger and you don't use your weapon because there's no SYG law, then I'm really glad I'm not your loved one.

The law has nothing to do with self-defense. It's a political wedge deliberately used to provoke an emotional response.
In my opinion SYG laws have gone to far, but at least part of the reasoning behind them is to protect people who legitimately use deadly force to protect themselves. I've read about cases over the years where a criminal would break into someone's home or business and end up suing the people or business, even though they were criminally entering, and winning at times. There should be a reasonable middle ground where you give people assurance that they can reasonably protect themselves and their loved ones, but not allow aggression when it's not necessary. This is where the Florida law is flawed to me. It should require a person to take reasonable steps to avoid a confrontation, but if a confrontation can't be avoided, then you're ok to defend yourself. Seems like common sense to me.
 
Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

In my opinion SYG laws have gone to far, but at least part of the reasoning behind them is to protect people who legitimately use deadly force to protect themselves. I've read about cases over the years where a criminal would break into someone's home or business and end up suing the people or business, even though they were criminally entering, and winning at times. There should be a reasonable middle ground where you give people assurance that they can reasonably protect themselves and their loved ones, but not allow aggression when it's not necessary. This is where the Florida law is flawed to me. It should require a person to take reasonable steps to avoid a confrontation, but if a confrontation can't be avoided, then you're ok to defend yourself. Seems like common sense to me.

An incredibly sensible post. Says exactly what needs to be said and what exactly should be the law.
 
Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

In my opinion SYG laws have gone to far, but at least part of the reasoning behind them is to protect people who legitimately use deadly force to protect themselves. I've read about cases over the years where a criminal would break into someone's home or business and end up suing the people or business, even though they were criminally entering, and winning at times. There should be a reasonable middle ground where you give people assurance that they can reasonably protect themselves and their loved ones, but not allow aggression when it's not necessary. This is where the Florida law is flawed to me. It should require a person to take reasonable steps to avoid a confrontation, but if a confrontation can't be avoided, then you're ok to defend yourself. Seems like common sense to me.

Bob, Bob, Bob - you are starting to sound like you are saying that a culture in which every issue, boo-boo, problem and offense needs to be addressed by a lawsuit and a politician vowing to never let this happen again might result in a plethora of laws and/or fine print trying to navigate those waters and sometimes the outcome is hard to comprehend.
 
Last edited:
Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

I liked the one where the burgler slipped on an icy porch and successfully sued the property owner for his medical bills from the injury because the owner hadn't properly cleaned off his porch.
 
Re: Florida vs. Zimmerman - Q.E.D????????

I liked the one where the burgler slipped on an icy porch and successfully sued the property owner for his medical bills from the injury because the owner hadn't properly cleaned off his porch.
That has the ring of urban legend. Not saying it is, but it definitely has that sound.
 
Back
Top