So what in the hell does THIS...........

t-dub said:

Your willingness to participate in social violence is on display here.

Click to expand...

It is? Wow.............

Please explain to me how you can extrapolate that from what I said.

Participate in social violence? Man, I've got to be one of the least violent men on the planet. I haven't had an altercation with another human being for, let's see now, about 39 years. Fuck altercation, I haven't argued with another human being in 39 years. Take that back..............only here.

I fully explained myself. You have reading to do.

I resubmit: Your attitude that I quoted before shows me all I need to know about your mindset and what you think you "know" about social and asocial violence. Your idea of an "escalating" fight like you describe is patently absurd on its face and invites an entire conversation with you that doesn't belong in this venue. This bar fight of yours (hypothetical social violence I guess?) the one where you are "ok" with getting your nose broken and seem to be a voluntary and willing participant, is a crime, and is so wrong on so many levels, that to include it in CHL discussion is a waste of everyones time.

Edit: Another example of your misunderstanding, quite dangerous in this day and age . . .

lwien said:

I've been in a few fist fights over the years ever since I was a kid and I can't imagine that it would be ok for anyone to pull a gun out and shoot me. That's insane.

From my point of view, you don't bring a gun to a fist fight anymore than you would bring a knife to a gunfight.

Click to expand...

its my understanding that now Zimmerman goes to a "stand your ground hearing" and if that goes his way, he is exonerated from any civil case and he can sue the family of the deceased for his court costs.

^^You need to recheck your facts...peace

Edit: further clarification: Stand your ground hearing was pre-trial and it was waived by Zimmerman. He still faces a civil suit.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/evanmcsan/civil-case-against-zimmerman-in-florida-has-little-chance-of

“Technically, there can still be a civil case,” said Tamara Rice Lave, a professor of criminal law at the University of Miami and a former San Diego public defender. “However, ‘Stand Your Ground’ is going to preclude that.”

Damn T-dub, I feel some hate going towards lwien and all I see trying to be done is his VALID point being argued that bringing a gun to a fist fight is not cool.
In my opinion about vaporonly's statement. If you feel you might die from being in a fist fight and the need to pull out a weapon to defend yourself.
You're a weakling, that shouldn't be given the right to take someone elses life because you FELT threatened from a punch. Fights happen and no they're not an OK thing, but pulling out a gun because your threatened you might die from a single punch. Is fucking outrageous, and clearly shows that most humans now look towards bullets to solve disputes. Which is incredibly sad. Utilizing Tools is what seperates us from the animal kingdom, and its what will destroy us if we continue down this road. A truly sad outcome for such a bright species.
My deepest concerns go out to all of you who depend on guns to save you from fists.

VapoRoor said:

Damn T-dub, I feel some hate going towards lwien....

Click to expand...

"The fact that you seem "ok" with fighting outside of a bar says a lot."
"Your willingness to participate in social violence is on display here."
"Your idea of an "escalating" fight like you describe is patently absurd"
"Another example of your misunderstanding, quite dangerous in this day and age . . ."
--t-dub

Yeah, I'm not quite sure where all this animosity is coming from. By the statements made about me above, apparently, t-dub feels that my "willingness to participate in social violence" is "patently absurd" and that my misunderstanding is "quite dangerous".

While I do agree that anyone who is willing to participate in social violence is patently absurd and is quite dangerous, I just don't, for the life of me, understand how or why I am being labeled as such. I just used an analogy to express a counterpoint in a debate and what I find absurd is that my use of that analogy automatically means that I am "willing to participate in social violence"? I just don't get the connection, but then, in my advancing years, my mind isn't quite as sharp as it used to be, so maybe I'm missing something here. T-dub has tried to explain it, but I just can't make the connection. If anyone else can shed some light on this, I'd appreciate it because I really feel that I am being accused of being someone whom I am not.

Let me clearly state that I am NOT willing to participate in social violence. I will try to avoid it at all costs, and I have been successful at that for a VERY long time. If someone threatens me with a punch to the face, I'd rather turn around and run like hell then get into any kind of fight. I'm a confirmed "chicken-shit" in that regard (at least for the past 40 years or so). So being that I would rather run away from a fight, you can only imagine my thoughts of pulling out a gun in a fight. And for this, I am "willing to participate in social violence"? What the........

Edit: I also don't understand the need for t-dub to make this personal simply because we're just debating an event that neither one of us participated in. One can disagree in a debate without attacking the source. I'm kinda dumbfounded by his responses here.

VapoRoor said:

Damn T-dub, I feel some hate going towards lwien and all I see trying to be done is his VALID point being argued that bringing a gun to a fist fight is not cool.
In my opinion about vaporonly's statement. If you feel you might die from being in a fist fight and the need to pull out a weapon to defend yourself.
You're a weakling, that shouldn't be given the right to take someone elses life because you FELT threatened from a punch. Fights happen and no they're not an OK thing, but pulling out a gun because your threatened you might die from a single punch. Is fucking outrageous, and clearly shows that most humans now look towards bullets to solve disputes. Which is incredibly sad. Utilizing Tools is what seperates us from the animal kingdom, and its what will destroy us if we continue down this road. A truly sad outcome for such a bright species.
My deepest concerns go out to all of you who depend on guns to save you from fists.

Click to expand...

You seem to be mistaking "a punch" with hiding in the bushes and pouncing on someone, beating their head into the cement and the reportedly telling him "You're gonna die tonight motherfucker"

None of us were there, and that is what the jury had to work with.
If someone attacked me and nearly broke my skull while threatening me, I would use deadly force to protect my life, if that makes me a weakling then so be it.

I don't think we need to get our community all split up and fighting over one murder case, hundreds of people are murdered daily, this case just happened to get a lot of attention.

AdmiralAlpacha said:

I don't think we need to get our community all split up and fighting over one murder case, hundreds of people are murdered daily, this case just happened to get a lot of attention.

Click to expand...

True that, but the fact that GZ was told to stay in his vehicle by the police & GZ clearly actively pursued TM by ignoring that suggestion from his local PD department shows that GZ felt the need to act and clearly fucked up. Might I add that GZ is a fucking way bigger person than TM. GZ also had MMA training and I find it extremely hard that A 17 year old boy could try and kill GZ.
Bottom line I've said what I said and the jury has said how they feel.
Im out

VapoRoor said:

Damn T-dub, I feel some hate going towards lwien and all I see trying to be done is his VALID point being argued that bringing a gun to a fist fight is not cool.
In my opinion about vaporonly's statement. If you feel you might die from being in a fist fight and the need to pull out a weapon to defend yourself.
You're a weakling, that shouldn't be given the right to take someone elses life because you FELT threatened from a punch. Fights happen and no they're not an OK thing, but pulling out a gun because your threatened you might die from a single punch. Is fucking outrageous, and clearly shows that most humans now look towards bullets to solve disputes. Which is incredibly sad. Utilizing Tools is what seperates us from the animal kingdom, and its what will destroy us if we continue down this road. A truly sad outcome for such a bright species.
My deepest concerns go out to all of you who depend on guns to save you from fists.

Click to expand...

please don't make it seem like i said it was perfectly ok to get in a fistfight and then pull your gun.

Iwien specifically asked if somebody comes up to you and starts punching you if you can use your ccw pistol to defend yourself. You can. You are being assaulted.

My deepest concern is macho 'tough' guys misunderstand the difference between a school yard fist fight and being assaulted on the street where the victim has no idea how far the perp will take it...and depend on their "fists of fury" to protect them from the violence and criminals out there daydreaming there is some code of the fist on the streets. If you live in a state with concealed carry please think twice about going up and starting to punch some complete stranger.

i'm sorry but i disagree that this case or the laws of self defense are a sad outcome for our species. what's sad is places like England where a solider can be beheaded in the street and it takes 20 mins extra for police to arrive because they needed to wait for armed police! And all the citizens were just standing around. that's sad.

edit: i don't want to ruffle feathers here with my opinions, there are plenty of opinions being thrown around out there about this.

i think both 'sides' are being riled up by this case intentionally.

Going back to the original topic of the post it turns out Zimmerman was on amphetamines and benzos. He most likely took them as prescribed but I still think it's ironic that there's so much focus on how TM's marijuana use could have made him violent when Zimmerman was on a drug that can actually make you more aggressive.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zim...juries-trayvon/story?id=16353532#.UeahS2TwIZc

Good find. Never knew this. I'm not surprised that this was never brought up in trial.

My final word on this is this. I think the jury did exactly the right thing with their decision to find Zimmerman innocent. I also think, however, that if the prosecution did their job correctly, from the jury selection all the way through to the closing arguments, the jury would have convicted Zimmerman of manslaughter. I have never seen such a cluster-fuck of a prosecution.....ever.

AdmiralAlpacha said:

I don't think we need to get our community all split up and fighting over one murder case, hundreds of people are murdered daily, this case just happened to get a lot of attention.

Click to expand...

This is something I agree with tenfold - and I think many have lost sight of this.

This has become a manufactured controversy. Don't get me wrong, what happened that night was terrible and Trayvon Martin never deserved to die. But on the other hand, I am deeply disturbed by the double standard that everyone else just seems to want to leave as an elephant in the room and continue on with... what I can only call a charade of emotional masturbation in debating the "controversy" around this particular murder.

Eight black men have been murdered within a twenty mile radius of the area Trayvon Martin was killed since that night. Eight other people, killed by other people - but there are no headlines. There is no debate. There is no controversy.

And why? It's because those people were killed by other black men. In the eyes of society - in the eyes of the media; they don't matter. Those stories won't drive ratings. They won't inspire hundreds of thousands of twitter crusaders or reddit hotshots to jump on the bandwagon and send the story to the front page. All they get is a little blip on crimemapping.com.

But, ho - as soon as we have a white man who has killed a black man that we can point a finger at, release the wolves. Suddenly it's the topic of all the morning talk shows. News outlets are interviewing whoever they can get and filling whole hour long segments on their anecdotal bull shit. And everyone is just lapping it right up.

Once the verdict came down, all the news outlets started talking about rioting. Never mind the fact there were no riots happening, that most protests were completely peaceful and there was only one incident that could have been considered a riot - there are news stories to be made. I get the sense they wanted there to be riots, and they tried to stoke the fires as much as they can to milk the news story a little longer.

I don't know, I just thought more people would... realize that all this shit is a distraction. No progress has been made thanks to these "debates". In fact - it's taking it in the other direction. It's driving stakes between races, between people, between friends - and for what? It's completely counter-intuitive.

I hope I don't come off as too abrasive or that I was aiming this at any particular member or groups of members here. I'm talking about the internet/society as a whole. We need to have a serious shift in the way we deal with and discuss these issues if we want any progress to be made.

I agree, Centi, but the news outlets are there to serve one purpose, and that is to drive revenues by gaining viewership or readership and they will report on those stories, in depth, if they feel that it will serve their purpose in this regard.

Since they have done this and made such a big deal about this case, it does serve as a microcosm facing many in the black community of being racially profiled unjustly. I'm not saying that that's what happened here in this case, but it has served as a catalyst for discussion, and in the long run, it may prove to be a very worthwhile discussion.

On the other hand, black on black murders, like what exists in Chicago, by their sheer numbers deserve MUCH more scrutiny and discussion as compared to what happened here.

In the short term, I agree that discussions on this case can actually create more tension, but in the long run, after the pot of emotions settles down a bit, it could prove to be a catalyst for change of good.

CentiZen said:

But, ho - as soon as we have a white man who has killed a black man that we can point a finger at

Click to expand...

except it's not even a white man, so the NYT laughably started calling him a "white hispanic"

you are absolutely right that this is a manufactured distraction. My opinion is that is a distraction away from an out of control lawless government (NSA, IRS, Benghazi, on and on) combined with the regulars who benefit from prompting racial divide.

We as Americans should be coming together to demand answers and make changes to fix the problems with the government and overreaching bureaucracy....We should be taking inspiration from the people of Egypt who came together to demand change in the largest political protests in history!

so it makes sense that the people in power want to divide us anyway they can, including race, just like the people who have made careers out of creating racial animosity.

Yes, the newly minted "white/hispanic" . . . gotta love that one. Race baiters like Jackson and Sharpton make their money on this kind of strife. They don't want the problem to go away because if it does, they become irrelevant.

My last clarification on social violence. I am a survivor of social violence. I still suffer from PTSD to this day because of it. The very idea of using social violence as a "tool" to "teach some one a lesson" or whatever is completely unacceptable. The very idea of an "escalating" physical confrontation is absurd, its a criminal act, and if anyone EVER lays hands on me they can expect an appropriate response, especially since I am disabled, quite frail, and am unable to "compete" physically with anyone.