Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by leogator, Jul 21, 2013.
well, many people are calling for vigilante justice for TM based upon imagined circumstances.....
And mostly because the LMSM has never reported the facts of this case about Trayvon's past...
Thanks for posting that helix.
My first thought when I saw that hypothetical was that only police can get away with shooting someone in that scenario.
If we're basing it upon what the NYPD can get away with in that scenario, I guess the correct response is to scream "Gun!" and then you and 5 or 6 other people around you proceed to shoot the guy between 60 and 70 times.
SYG has already seen people get arrested for using trying to use if for their own crimes.
These people were not protected from their acts.
But taking all rights to defend yourself sure is sweet if you make a living robbing or have the great hobby of rape.
I think the increase has more to do with the fact that more of us are arming ourselves so when some punk accosts us and threatens are well being they get their lights put out
So James Bond was issued a Stand Your Ground permit? :grin:
Are you willing to give up your rights under SYG because on rare occasions criminals get away with killing other criminals?
When your provoke someone, wouldn't it be wiser to skip the busted nose and head slamming into concrete.
Looks like some on here are more concerned with the safety of crooks than their victims.
Not only that but if you read the actual statute, SYG requires that you cannot be engaged in unlawful activity.
Appeared the case in the Roderick Scott case back in 2009... a black neighborhood watchman who shot and killed white 17 year old Christopher Cevini in self defense, and Scott was a martial artist and Cervini never laid a hand on him.
Scott openly intervened himself into Cervini and his two friends trying to break into a neighbor's car. Two of the boys ran but Cervini instead charged at Scott and was shot dead for it.
Remember all the riots that occurred because of this? Remember Obama going on t.v. and talking about how tragic and unfair an incident this was? :roll:
I don't even remember the case, let alone the riots & Obama calling for a public outcry. Must have been during football season.
Exactly my point.
Perception does not bust your nose.
Running away is kinda hard with someone on top of you.
Z had wounds, that and eye witness testimony meant he was in his right to defend himself even under the old rules that you must run.
Martin under the old rules had the same law saying he had to run. If he had just hit Z and run and got shot in the back, I would help you tie the noose.
It is not a license to kill. It is a returning to the American male his cajones, his huevos, ones nads or "balls" as they say. Prior to SYG you were expected to act like the french and run scared or act like a yellow bellied yankee. Now you simply have the right to SYG and and if someone tries to bully you can be safe in knowing that there imposing physical stature doesn't mean you have to fear. God made all men, Samuel Colt made all men equal. We talk about bullying in school and how terrible it is, yet we say, to grown adults runs for them thar hills. Take your pride and manliness and be ashamed of it. Let the bigger guy or pack of teenage never do wells run you off.
No, I say, simply be a man and tell them to go have intercourse with themselves. And if they decide to make an argument in to a violent situation, woes to them who only bring their fists to a gun fight.
Seems, more like the kind of thing we American's would be proud of, like our pioneering fore fathers. I mean we have done away with national sovereignty for foreign nations and even trials for Americans and will drop a bomb on ya wherever you may be. Why can't a red blooded american male drop some lead on a person who wants to do them harm?
Hope this is at least partly joking...
Because if not, even as a strong supporter of SYG myself this is one of the dumber defenses of it that I have seen.
It got passed largely to get rid of the "could you have run or not" legal limbo people who are having to act out of instinct in a self-defense situation were facing, not to endorse an absurd "You want to insult me? I've got balls, prepare to eat lead!" brand of idiocy. In fact I think that is the primary argument against it.
Oh you mean, like if you pick a fight and you're losing, you can then shoot your opponent and claim self defense?
What happned to fight like a man and use only your hands?
Yeah, really, when did jumping on top of somebody and using concrete become ok?