Jump to content






Photo

The Exploitation of Trayvon Martin


  • Please log in to reply
884 replies to this topic

#101 Brant Gaede

Brant Gaede

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 16,364 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tucson, AZ
  • Interests:All kinds of stuff

Posted 16 April 2012 - 10:13 PM

What is your opinion on gun control laws?
I do not know enough about it to have an opinion, except to say that it’s not of primary importance. Forbidding guns or registering them is not going to stop criminals from having them; nor is it a great threat to the private, noncriminal citizen if he has to register the fact that he has a gun. It’s not an important issue, unless you’re ready to begin a private uprising right now, which isn’t very practical.
What is your attitude toward gun control?
It’s a complex, technical issue in the philosophy of law. Handguns are instruments for killing people–they are not carried for hunting animals–and you have no right to kill people. You do have the right to self-defense, however. I don’t know how the issue is to be resolved to protect you without giving you the privilege to kill people at whim.

Jews! Register your guns!

--Brant

Rational Individualist, Rational self-interest, Individual Rights--limited government libertarian heavily influenced by Objectivism


#102 daunce lynam

daunce lynam

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 8,077 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Hockey, what else is there?

Posted 16 April 2012 - 10:19 PM


But the only sensible comment at the root of the whole issue of an armed citizenry I have read was made by Ayn Rand: the handgun is a tool for killing people. That's all she said, and when she's right, she's right.


Carol:

Except when she is wrong as in this case. I have had guns all my life, properly trained. A handgun is a tool for protecting yourself. It is a shield which converts to a sword when necessary.

More people are killed with knives than you could possibly believe.

Now let us say that the members of that group that attempted to murder George's truck driver had grown up in a civilly armed society, one of two (2) possibilities would have developed from their exposure to that civilly armed society:

1) they would have been walking on tip toes and much more cordial and respectful; or
2) someone would have killed them long ago.

The results are a more courteous society wherein people respect each other because they have to.

Additionally, rape and assaults on women decreases dramatically when the civil citizenry are armed.

You may not like what I am saying, but it is a fact of reality. More guns, less crime.

Adam



But the only sensible comment at the root of the whole issue of an armed citizenry I have read was made by Ayn Rand: the handgun is a tool for killing people. That's all she said, and when she's right, she's right.


Carol:

Except when she is wrong as in this case. I have had guns all my life, properly trained. A handgun is a tool for protecting yourself. It is a shield which converts to a sword when necessary.

More people are killed with knives than you could possibly believe.

Now let us say that the members of that group that attempted to murder George's truck driver had grown up in a civilly armed society, one of two (2) possibilities would have developed from their exposure to that civilly armed society:

1) they would have been walking on tip toes and much more cordial and respectful; or
2) someone would have killed them long ago.

The results are a more courteous society wherein people respect each other because they have to.

Additionally, rape and assaults on women decreases dramatically when the civil citizenry are armed.

You may not like what I am saying, but it is a fact of reality. More guns, less crime.

Adam


More guns, fewer people.

#103 Selene

Selene

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 16,400 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Jersey
  • Interests:Chess, birding, football, baseball, minimalist backpacking, argumentation and debate, politics and philosophy, strategic board gaming, history, Rand, poetry, writing.

Posted 16 April 2012 - 10:27 PM

More guns, fewer people.


Precisely...we will save the planet, end global warming, save the polar bears, prevent the seas from rising...Hallelujah - praise the LORD...pass the ammunition...

Yes we shall save the planer....
"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice..and moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue."

#104 Selene

Selene

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 16,400 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Jersey
  • Interests:Chess, birding, football, baseball, minimalist backpacking, argumentation and debate, politics and philosophy, strategic board gaming, history, Rand, poetry, writing.

Posted 17 April 2012 - 03:31 AM

Trayvon Martin's killer showed signs of injury: neighbors
By Chris Francescani

SANFORD, Florida | Mon Apr 16, 2012 6:40pm EDT

(Reuters) - Neighbors of George Zimmerman say he had bandages on his nose and head the day after he shot dead Trayvon Martin, supporting statements by the neighborhood watch volunteer that he was beaten in a confrontation with the black Florida teenager.

The extent of Zimmerman's injuries could be crucial to his legal defense under Florida's "Stand Your Ground" self-defense law, which allows the use of deadly force when someone has the reasonable belief he could face death or great bodily harm.

Police said Zimmerman, who has been charged with second-degree murder in the racially charged case, was bleeding from the nose and the back of his head and was treated by medics before being taken to Sanford police station after the February 26 shooting.

But public doubts were later raised by the release of a grainy surveillance video from the police station in which no injuries were readily visible.

Zimmerman later sought medical treatment for injuries including a broken nose, his former lawyers have said.

Jorge Rodriguez, Zimmerman's next-door neighbor, told Reuters that when he saw Zimmerman the day after the incident, "he had two big, butterfly bandages on the back of his head, and another big bandage...on the bridge of his nose." He was talking to a police detective in his driveway.

Rodriguez's wife Audria also said she saw the bandages and a third neighbor, who spoke only on condition of anonymity, agreed with the Rodriguez couple's account. "I saw two bandages on the back of his head, and his nose was all swollen up," said the witness, who had watched from a nearby second-floor window.

The neighbors spoke to Reuters on Sunday and Monday, saying they felt they owed him their public support after he was charged with second-degree murder.

Zimmerman, 28, was originally released after the shooting, when Sanford police accepted his claim of self-defense. He was arrested and charged by a special prosecutor last week after demonstrations around the country at which the police were accused of failing to properly investigate the death of the black 17-year-old.

Zimmerman, who had been in hiding since shortly after the shooting, turned himself in.

Witness accounts have supported Zimmerman's story that there was some kind of fight between him and Martin. Martin was returning with candy from a convenience store to his father's fiancee's home in a gated community when Zimmerman spotted him and called to police to say the teen appeared suspicious.

Zimmerman's father and brother have said he had his nose broken and feared for his life before taking out his licensed handgun and shooting Martin dead.

The neighbors said they spoke to Sanford police and the FBI in their investigations but did not recall speaking to the office of special prosecutor Angela Corey, who charged Zimmerman with second-degree murder.

Corey's office and Sanford police declined to comment on the matter and Zimmerman's attorney Mark O'Mara did not return calls for comment.
(Reporting by Chris Francescani; Editing by Daniel Trotta and David Storey)

http://www.reuters.c...E83F19Y20120416
"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice..and moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue."

#105 BaalChatzaf

BaalChatzaf

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 11,646 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Currently residing in New Jersey, the Bad-a-Bing State.
  • Interests:mathematics, physics, alternative energy sources.

    I am also involved in preparing recorded books for blind and dyslexic folks.

Posted 17 April 2012 - 04:38 AM

What is your opinion on gun control laws?
I do not know enough about it to have an opinion, except to say that it’s not of primary importance. Forbidding guns or registering them is not going to stop criminals from having them; nor is it a great threat to the private, noncriminal citizen if he has to register the fact that he has a gun. It’s not an important issue, unless you’re ready to begin a private uprising right now, which isn’t very practical.
What is your attitude toward gun control?
It’s a complex, technical issue in the philosophy of law. Handguns are instruments for killing people–they are not carried for hunting animals–and you have no right to kill people. You do have the right to self-defense, however. I don’t know how the issue is to be resolved to protect you without giving you the privilege to kill people at whim.

There is no sure fire resolution. If people are allowed to kill to defend themselves, then some people will make bloody murder look like self defense.

As Heinlein said: An armed society is a polite society.

Ba'al Chatzaf
אויב מיין באָבע האט בייצים זי וואָלט זיין מיין זיידע

#106 Dglgmut

Dglgmut

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 1,100 posts

Posted 17 April 2012 - 07:54 AM

More guns, fewer people.


Why is it just an unfortunate event if someone falls onto the subway tracks and gets killed, but if they threaten or attack someone and get killed then all of a sudden it's an avoidable death?

Threatening to kill someone or attacking someone should be considered equally as stupid as fooling around on the subway tracks, and people should expect it to be dangerous.

#107 daunce lynam

daunce lynam

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 8,077 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Hockey, what else is there?

Posted 17 April 2012 - 08:22 AM

More guns, fewer people.


Why is it just an unfortunate event if someone falls onto the subway tracks and gets killed, but if they threaten or attack someone and get killed then all of a sudden it's an avoidable death?

Threatening to kill someone or attacking someone should be considered equally as stupid as fooling around on the subway tracks, and people should expect it to be dangerous.


More guns, fewer people.


Why is it just an unfortunate event if someone falls onto the subway tracks and gets killed, but if they threaten or attack someone and get killed then all of a sudden it's an avoidable death?

Threatening to kill someone or attacking someone should be considered equally as stupid as fooling around on the subway tracks, and people should expect it to be dangerous.


More guns, fewer people.


Why is it just an unfortunate event if someone falls onto the subway tracks and gets killed, but if they threaten or attack someone and get killed then all of a sudden it's an avoidable death?

Threatening to kill someone or attacking someone should be considered equally as stupid as fooling around on the subway tracks, and people should expect it to be dangerous.


More guns, fewer people.


Why is it just an unfortunate event if someone falls onto the subway tracks and gets killed, but if they threaten or attack someone and get killed then all of a sudden it's an avoidable death?

Threatening to kill someone or attacking someone should be considered equally as stupid as fooling around on the subway tracks, and people should expect it to be dangerous.

Because everyone has a right to be stupid, unfortunately. But as Rand said, not a right to kill people.

#108 Dglgmut

Dglgmut

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 1,100 posts

Posted 17 April 2012 - 08:34 AM

Because everyone has a right to be stupid, unfortunately. But as Rand said, not a right to kill people.


Whoa.... A right to be stupid? So attacking someone is just "stupid" but killing someone in self-defense is infringing on another individual's right to stupidity?

#109 daunce lynam

daunce lynam

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 8,077 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Hockey, what else is there?

Posted 17 April 2012 - 08:44 AM

Because everyone has a right to be stupid, unfortunately. But as Rand said, not a right to kill people.


Whoa.... A right to be stupid? So attacking someone is just "stupid" but killing someone in self-defense is infringing on another individual's right to stupidity?


Because everyone has a right to be stupid, unfortunately. But as Rand said, not a right to kill people.


Whoa.... A right to be stupid? So attacking someone is just "stupid" but killing someone in self-defense is infringing on another individual's right to stupidity?


Killing infringes on an individual's fundamental right to life, and if that life is stupid it is still a life.

#110 daunce lynam

daunce lynam

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 8,077 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Hockey, what else is there?

Posted 17 April 2012 - 08:51 AM

I don't know why these multiples keep showing up. I only push quote once and edit out the extras, but when I push save changes, they just reappear. Blame the coelacanth.

#111 Mikee

Mikee

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 1,236 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 April 2012 - 10:13 AM

You have the right to risk your own life with your stupidity, you don't have the right to risk others lives. You would not feel sorry for a young man who drove his car 120 mph over a cliff, you wouldn't even feel particularly sorry for a rock climber who climbed a 1000 foot cliff with no ropes and fell to his death. To them the "thrill" was worth the risk but the risk is nevertheless real. You're okay with taking the risk out of the "thrill" of smacking someone over the head with a 2x4 where the person doing the smacking is not risking his own life but someone else's. Somehow you think his life is the equal of the man being smacked. Punching someone in the head, banging someone's head into the pavement, hitting someone in the head with a board, these are not trivial things, not "boy's will be boy's" activities. Evidently you have never visited anyone in the hospital on a respirator with a tracheotomy, unable to read or write or see clearly who later died after being hit in the head. The people who impose their violence on unwilling others are cowards. They do not care what harm they do to get their thrill. This should be a very, very dangerous pasttime. I would like to see the day where these thugs were afraid to accoust every little old lady walking down the street for fear of getting their heads blown off. The life of a thug is not worth the life of a rights respecting person.

#112 Brant Gaede

Brant Gaede

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 16,364 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tucson, AZ
  • Interests:All kinds of stuff

Posted 17 April 2012 - 11:22 AM

I don't know why these multiples keep showing up. I only push quote once and edit out the extras, but when I push save changes, they just reappear. Blame the coelacanth.

Then go to the edit function and edit out the dup. to see what happens.

--Brant

Rational Individualist, Rational self-interest, Individual Rights--limited government libertarian heavily influenced by Objectivism


#113 Brant Gaede

Brant Gaede

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 16,364 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tucson, AZ
  • Interests:All kinds of stuff

Posted 17 April 2012 - 11:31 AM

You can kill someone in self defense. There is no right to murder someone. If someone comes at you--to cite the extreme example--with deadly force, say a knife or a gun--he is giving you permission to kill him. It's a form of suicide. He has a right to kill himself. Some instances are called "suicide by cop." In the case of someone trying to do you harm, as opposed to the latter example, he may not know it's an attempt at suicide, but ignorance is no defense. What is primary is the right to self defense. If you don't have that you have no protectable rights that mean much. We cannot say the police have no right to kill certain criminals engaging in certain egregious behavior.

--Brant

Rational Individualist, Rational self-interest, Individual Rights--limited government libertarian heavily influenced by Objectivism


#114 whYNOT

whYNOT

    tony garland

  • Members
  • 3,474 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Republic of South Africa

Posted 17 April 2012 - 12:29 PM

It's all kind of egalitarianist. And that brings to mind the last Gaza - Israel war.
In all the "right" circles at that time, the gravest concern was the immorality of
'disproportionate response'.

"They killed only 3 of your people - how can you justify killing 20 of theirs' !"

("Um...suicide by cop?")

The egalitarian would insist that if someone comes at you with a 2 X 4,
you should find a 2X4 plank to defend yourself, too.
"To know that we know what we know, and to know that we do not know what we do not know, that is true knowledge". Nicolaus Copernicus (An original objectivist) 1473-1543 ***No man may be smaller than his philosophy...***

#115 daunce lynam

daunce lynam

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 8,077 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Hockey, what else is there?

Posted 17 April 2012 - 12:45 PM


I don't know why these multiples keep showing up. I only push quote once and edit out the extras, but when I push save changes, they just reappear. Blame the coelacanth.

Then go to the edit function and edit out the dup. to see what happens.

--Brant



I don't know why these multiples keep showing up. I only push quote once and edit out the extras, but when I push save changes, they just reappear. Blame the coelacanth.

Then go to the edit function and edit out the dup. to see what happens.

--Brant


I did that - I said I edited out the extras. But nothing happened.

#116 daunce lynam

daunce lynam

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 8,077 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Hockey, what else is there?

Posted 17 April 2012 - 12:46 PM

Look at that! It is happening every damn time. I only pushed quote once but it keeps quoting twice.

#117 Dglgmut

Dglgmut

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 1,100 posts

Posted 17 April 2012 - 07:33 PM

You have the right to risk your own life with your stupidity, you don't have the right to risk others lives. You would not feel sorry for a young man who drove his car 120 mph over a cliff, you wouldn't even feel particularly sorry for a rock climber who climbed a 1000 foot cliff with no ropes and fell to his death. To them the "thrill" was worth the risk but the risk is nevertheless real. You're okay with taking the risk out of the "thrill" of smacking someone over the head with a 2x4 where the person doing the smacking is not risking his own life but someone else's. Somehow you think his life is the equal of the man being smacked. Punching someone in the head, banging someone's head into the pavement, hitting someone in the head with a board, these are not trivial things, not "boy's will be boy's" activities. Evidently you have never visited anyone in the hospital on a respirator with a tracheotomy, unable to read or write or see clearly who later died after being hit in the head. The people who impose their violence on unwilling others are cowards. They do not care what harm they do to get their thrill. This should be a very, very dangerous pasttime. I would like to see the day where these thugs were afraid to accoust every little old lady walking down the street for fear of getting their heads blown off. The life of a thug is not worth the life of a rights respecting person.


Thank you. Driving off a cliff would have been the perfect example of stupidity but I couldn't think of it.

#118 Brant Gaede

Brant Gaede

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 16,364 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tucson, AZ
  • Interests:All kinds of stuff

Posted 17 April 2012 - 09:25 PM



I don't know why these multiples keep showing up. I only push quote once and edit out the extras, but when I push save changes, they just reappear. Blame the coelacanth.

Then go to the edit function and edit out the dup. to see what happens.

--Brant



I don't know why these multiples keep showing up. I only push quote once and edit out the extras, but when I push save changes, they just reappear. Blame the coelacanth.

Then go to the edit function and edit out the dup. to see what happens.

--Brant


I did that - I said I edited out the extras. But nothing happened.

Stop pushing the "quote." Use that only to initially quote the entire post you'd like to quote from. Then highlight all the text you want to delete and push the delete button on your keyboard. Then add your own words.

--Brant

Rational Individualist, Rational self-interest, Individual Rights--limited government libertarian heavily influenced by Objectivism


#119 Selene

Selene

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 16,400 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Jersey
  • Interests:Chess, birding, football, baseball, minimalist backpacking, argumentation and debate, politics and philosophy, strategic board gaming, history, Rand, poetry, writing.

Posted 17 April 2012 - 09:33 PM

Add your words on the line below the last "[ /quote ]" mark...
"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice..and moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue."

#120 daunce lynam

daunce lynam

    $$$$$$

  • Members
  • 8,077 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Hockey, what else is there?

Posted 19 April 2012 - 01:35 PM


What is your opinion on gun control laws?
I do not know enough about it to have an opinion, except to say that it’s not of primary importance. Forbidding guns or registering them is not going to stop criminals from having them; nor is it a great threat to the private, noncriminal citizen if he has to register the fact that he has a gun. It’s not an important issue, unless you’re ready to begin a private uprising right now, which isn’t very practical.
What is your attitude toward gun control?
It’s a complex, technical issue in the philosophy of law. Handguns are instruments for killing people–they are not carried for hunting animals–and you have no right to kill people. You do have the right to self-defense, however. I don’t know how the issue is to be resolved to protect you without giving you the privilege to kill people at whim.

There is no sure fire resolution. If people are allowed to kill to defend themselves, then some people will make bloody murder look like self defense.

As Heinlein said: An armed society is a polite society.

Ba'al Chatzaf



What is your opinion on gun control laws?
I do not know enough about it to have an opinion, except to say that it’s not of primary importance. Forbidding guns or registering them is not going to stop criminals from having them; nor is it a great threat to the private, noncriminal citizen if he has to register the fact that he has a gun. It’s not an important issue, unless you’re ready to begin a private uprising right now, which isn’t very practical.
What is your attitude toward gun control?
It’s a complex, technical issue in the philosophy of law. Handguns are instruments for killing people–they are not carried for hunting animals–and you have no right to kill people. You do have the right to self-defense, however. I don’t know how the issue is to be resolved to protect you without giving you the privilege to kill people at whim.

There is no sure fire resolution. If people are allowed to kill to defend themselves, then some people will make bloody murder look like self defense.

As Heinlein said: An armed society is a polite society.

Ba'al Chatzaf


He did not add, it's also a paranoid, hypocritical society.

Canada is a polite society, in the main, without the implicit threat that anyone who finds an individual discourteous can shoot him dead.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users