Occupy the Globe

This too shall pass.
Simple Minded

Re: Occupy the Globe

Post by Simple Minded »

Ibrahim wrote:
Demon of Undoing wrote:You know what's happened since the high water mark of tourist crime, what happened in the intervening time that also saw the drop in rates occur subsequently?

Concealed weapons permits. To a lesser extent, the castle doctrine. Wrap your head around that one.

The same drop occurred in other Western nations that didn't adopt these measures, and we don't see a drop in crime in developing countries with plenty of AKs and machetes kicking around. Social scientists sometimes argue that it is due to the success of preventative policing measures and community engagement, but I think somebody already pointed out that those two decades or so were the richest and most peaceful in human history (not a challenge to top most of history, but still) and that this translated to less crime at home in the comfortable nations. A crass answer, but a convincing one.
good point Ibrahim. The last few decades have been the richest in history in the West. Excess cash, plenty of bread & circuses. Fat dumb & overloaded on carbohydrates tends to make one tolerant or at least apathetic...
Simple Minded

Re: Occupy the Globe

Post by Simple Minded »

Ibrahim wrote:
Demon of Undoing wrote:Sure. But as I posted on the issue in the guns thread, my point is not that guns make us safer as a whole( ie dropping crime rates). Instead, my contention is that they make us safer as individuals ( better to have the option of self defense than not, on an individual level), but don't make us appreciably less safe as a society.See my post to Sparky on the breakdown ( can't do copypasta, on phone).
I don't know how you would measure this. What are the guiding statistics? Anecdotal evidence ("man shoots robber" headlines, etc) don't get us anywhere. If you and I pass one another on the street, and we safer if we are both armed? Neither armed? One of us armed? It's like some medieval logic problem that can be argued equally well from any side.
Demon is absolutely right. Need to measure? Why?

Just ask yourself the following question: If tomorrow morning you decide to change professions and become a human predator, where are you going to set up shop?
a. In a region where guns are part of the local culture, and you can pretty much expect every kid over the age of ten to be capable of handling one, where 4 out of 5 houses have a gun inside, and maybe one in 8 cars has a gun inside, in other words a region where your potential victim (or a bystander) has a high probabiltiy of being able to respond to your attack with lethal force.
or
b. a region where guns are extremely difficult for the common man to acquire, and if he so much as brandishes one, he will be prosecuted worse than most criminals, in other words a region where your potential victim (or a bystander) has a low probabiltiy of being able to respond to your threat with lethal force.

I think at a certain point, even the stupid person becomes more concerned with the probability of their own survival, and less concerned with statistics and history. Who cares what the data show? Data can be manipulated to show almost anything. I'll bet on the basic human instinct for self-preservation any day.
Simple Minded

Re: Occupy the Globe

Post by Simple Minded »

Demon of Undoing wrote:Oh, man. Do not act like a Black Panther in Central Florida, officially, as of now.. It is no longer safe.

Trayvon Martin case: New Black Panthers offer $10,000 bounty for capture of George Zimmerman
ANFORD — Members of the New Black Panther Party are offering a $10,000 reward for the "capture" of George Zimmerman, leader Mikhail Muhammad announced during a protest in Sanford today.

When asked whether he was inciting violence, Muhammad replied defiantly saying: "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth."

The bounty announcement came moments after members of the group called for the mobilization of 10,000 black men to capture George Zimmerman, the Neighborhood Watch volunteer who shot Trayvon Martin last month.

Muhammad said members of his group would search for Zimmerman themselves in Maitland and Jacksonville -- where the 28-year old worked before the shooting, employees there told the Orlando Sentinel. But he declined to say when they will begin their hunt.
Oh, you stupid, stupid bastards. This is not good. At all.
No, not at all good. too many people are going to be looking over their shoulders and expecting trouble.

Never good to threaten or scare the person you do not know.

And it is not going to be the tough guy who shoots first and asks questions later, it is going to be the person who is very scared.
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Occupy the Globe

Post by Mr. Perfect »

I think gun sales are just going to climb, climb, climb, climb, climb....
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
monster_gardener
Posts: 5334
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 12:36 am
Location: Trolla. Land of upside down trees and tomatos........

What Pathers doing is BAD but City is in High Irony Mode....

Post by monster_gardener »

Demon of Undoing wrote:Oh, man. Do not act like a Black Panther in Central Florida, officially, as of now.. It is no longer safe.

Trayvon Martin case: New Black Panthers offer $10,000 bounty for capture of George Zimmerman
ANFORD — Members of the New Black Panther Party are offering a $10,000 reward for the "capture" of George Zimmerman, leader Mikhail Muhammad announced during a protest in Sanford today.

When asked whether he was inciting violence, Muhammad replied defiantly saying: "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth."

The bounty announcement came moments after members of the group called for the mobilization of 10,000 black men to capture George Zimmerman, the Neighborhood Watch volunteer who shot Trayvon Martin last month.

Muhammad said members of his group would search for Zimmerman themselves in Maitland and Jacksonville -- where the 28-year old worked before the shooting, employees there told the Orlando Sentinel. But he declined to say when they will begin their hunt.
Oh, you stupid, stupid bastards. This is not good. At all.
Thank You Very Much for your post, Demon.

I agree.............

But IMVHO this seems ironic........
"The City is requesting calm heads and no vigilante justice," the statement said. "Attempts by civilians to take any person into custody may result in criminal charges or unnecessary violence."
Who does this remind me of?................ Zimmerman............
Former Orange-Osceola County prosecutor Esther Whitehead said the Panthers' bounty opens them up to civil and possibly criminal liability.

"I can't see how anyone can go out and take action as a private citizen without some government action like the issuance of a warrant," she said. "It doesn't make sense. It doesn't sound reasonable."
Doesn't that sound like what Zimmerman was doing.............. So why no warrant for him.........

IMVHO It may be time to take Zimmerman into protective custody............

And collect that $10,000 reward that the Panthers are offering....... ;) :twisted: :lol: :lol: :lol:
For the love of G_d, consider you & I may be mistaken.
Orion Must Rise: Killer Space Rocks Coming Our way
The Best Laid Plans of Men, Monkeys & Pigs Oft Go Awry
Woe to those who long for the Day of the Lord, for It is Darkness, Not Light
Ibrahim
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:06 am

Re: Occupy the Globe

Post by Ibrahim »

Demon of Undoing wrote:Oh, man. Do not act like a Black Panther in Central Florida, officially, as of now.. It is no longer safe.

More or less safe than buying Skittles?



(sorry, had to 8-) )
Ibrahim
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:06 am

Re: Occupy the Globe

Post by Ibrahim »

Demon of Undoing wrote:
I don't know how you would measure this. What are the guiding statistics? Anecdotal evidence ("man shoots robber" headlines, etc) don't get us anywhere. If you and I pass one another on the street, and we safer if we are both armed? Neither armed? One of us armed? It's like some medieval logic problem that can be argued equally well from any side.
Doesn't even go to statistics, but general principles. If you and I are both legally armed and behaving legally, not only do I have nothing to fear, but I welcome your presence. If you are armed, but not so lawful, then I am absolutely the better off for having the option to be armed, too. I can be, as a law abiding citizen, disarmed. As a practical matter, Outlaw Ibrahim can not. More choices+ more capability is almost never a bad thing. Well, at least, for me. But what is good for me ain't necessarily good for a regular human bein'.
I look at it as a probability game. There is a chance of either of us defending ourselves against a deadly attack with our firearms. But there is also a chance of one of us misunderstanding a situation and using our firearms when we didn't need to, or both of us turning them on each other under some misapprehension that the other is acting aggressively (then responding the firearms, which actually do denote aggression), thereby escalating the situation. Not to mention straight up accidents (comedy scenarios where ppl shoot themselves in the asscheek or foot), plus accidentally shooting people we didn't mean to shoot, family members accidentally shooting themselves with our guns, etc.

Now, all of these things are avoidable, and some are more likely than others. But if we don't have firearms to begin with then they are impossible by definition. Then we are reduced to the one scenario where this is disadvantageous: the scenario in which somebody wanted to commit violence against us or our home/family.
This actually raises another problematic social issue. We can agree that guns themselves don't bring safety and security, but guns in the hands of "certain people." The model of "responsible gun owners" as opposed to "gang bangers" other other undesirables is inevitably going to have racial and socio-economic overlaps that have even more distressing implications.
I don't see the problem. I don't want to take guns out of anybody's hands except those the law does not allow to have them. A gang banger that I want disarmed has exactly the same profile as Barney Fife wannabes with a conviction for felony theft- they broke the law. Until Upgradd( with two D's, for a double dose of the pimping) is convicted of a felony, he's just a dude presumed innocent. I shoot with these guys sometimes, give them tips. Black people with A's hats and hoodies deserve to be able to legally defend themselves, too. Hell, they are more likely to need it than I.
But the supposition that those people are potential gang bangers is widely held. Moreover, people who live in communities with high levels of gang violence tend to have a hostile attitude towards guns generally. I don't know how that relates to the idea that more guns make people safer.

My understanding of events is that Zimmerman didn't pull his weapon until his interrogation had escalated into a fight, which he might have been getting the worse of. This is why his self-defense legal position may work. He provoked a fight, started to lose it, and on the basis that he thought he might get killed by this black youth, gunned him down. If he approached weapon-up that would be another matter again. Florida law allows for more subtlety in determining his intent and frame of mind, which ultimately means who the jury finds sympathetic.

Really it's Zimmerman's bad luck for shooting a relatively spotless character. If he'd shot an innocent black youth who, say, had a marijuana arrest or was dropout, he'd have a much better chance of getting off. If we was an actual cop he'd definitely walk, maybe lose his job at best. These are the vagaries that influence criminal trials.
My understanding was that he was under suspension. That may suffice. This is the 21st century, after all.
Who was suspended from what?

Generally, to shoot an unarmed person, there has to be significant disparity of force. Shooting because you are losing a fight ( especially one you started or reasonably could have avoided) is not going to be cleared. The conflict is if he can show a reasonable fear to a jury, as you say. I don't think he can win that.
I agree. But as I understand the Florida law, if the Zimmerman team can convince the jury that he was certain his life was in danger then using his firearm is justified. Now I think that's an uphill battle, and the jury pool is probably badly tainted against this guy nationwide, but the possibility is there.
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Occupy the Globe

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Ibrahim wrote: I agree. But as I understand the Florida law, if the Zimmerman team can convince the jury that he was certain his life was in danger then using his firearm is justified.
Ibrahim, I wonder if you would be able to cite the state code, the text, that gives you this impression.
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Zack Morris
Posts: 2837
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2011 8:52 am
Location: Bayside High School

Re: Occupy the Globe

Post by Zack Morris »

Mr. Perfect wrote:http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/ ... QF20120323
"If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon," Obama said in his first comments about the shooting, acknowledging the racial element in the case.
Hmm Barack, who's child does Zimmerman look like, I wonder.
Leave it to the GOP to turn a moment of honest empathy into "despicable" "race baiting". Politically correct drama queens.
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Occupy the Globe

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Zack Morris wrote:
Mr. Perfect wrote:http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/ ... QF20120323
"If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon," Obama said in his first comments about the shooting, acknowledging the racial element in the case.
Hmm Barack, who's child does Zimmerman look like, I wonder.
Leave it to the GOP to turn a moment of honest empathy into "despicable" "race baiting". Politically correct drama queens.
As I said Zack Morris, keep handing us your voters and we'll take them. ;)

As always, you can win all the arguments and be the "smart one", well win the elections. :)
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Zack Morris
Posts: 2837
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2011 8:52 am
Location: Bayside High School

Re: Occupy the Globe

Post by Zack Morris »

Mr. Perfect wrote: As I said Zack Morris, keep handing us your voters and we'll take them. ;)

As always, you can win all the arguments and be the "smart one", well win the elections. :)
Who's we? The guys on your cow-pie ultimate frisbee league? There aren't enough of you and your ranks are thinning. The best you can hope for is adopting a progressive platform (victory for my team). I can see it happening already: you're running the architect of Obamacare as your candidate for POTUS and some of your most promising up-and-coming stars are growing softer on immigration by the month, it seems.
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Occupy the Globe

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Well, I guess when you aren't even aware of the obvious counterarguments to your material then you are more insular than I imagined, and things are going better for me than I was hoping.

BTW Zack, hispanics LOVE cow-pie ultimate frisbee, you will find out about that way after the point it becomes important. :)
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
Zack Morris
Posts: 2837
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2011 8:52 am
Location: Bayside High School

Re: Occupy the Globe

Post by Zack Morris »

Mr. Perfect wrote:Well, I guess when you aren't even aware of the obvious counterarguments to your material then you are more insular than I imagined, and things are going better for me than I was hoping.

BTW Zack, hispanics LOVE cow-pie ultimate frisbee, you will find out about that way after the point it becomes important. :)
Hispanics love jobs and the engines of job creation in America are Democratic districts. You'll find that out soon enough. Maybe one day, we progressives will say 'enough' and cut off your subsidies and unfair political influence by reforming the Electoral College system. I dream of that day, Mr. P, and I've got a lot of time yet to contribute to making it happen.
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Occupy the Globe

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Zack Morris wrote: Hispanics love jobs and the engines of job creation in America are Democratic districts.
Sure thing. California, what an economic miracle. ;)
You'll find that out soon enough. Maybe one day, we progressives will say 'enough' and cut off your subsidies and unfair political influence by reforming the Electoral College system.
No you won't. :)
I dream of that day, Mr. P, and I've got a lot of time yet to contribute to making it happen.
I hope you put your all into it, I really do.
Censorship isn't necessary
Simple Minded

Re: Occupy the Globe

Post by Simple Minded »

Ibrahim wrote:
Demon of Undoing wrote:Oh, man. Do not act like a Black Panther in Central Florida, officially, as of now.. It is no longer safe.

More or less safe than buying Skittles?



(sorry, had to 8-) )
When Skitttles are outlawed..... only outlaws will have Skittles!!!

Michelle will probably need another term to implement...
Last edited by Simple Minded on Sun Mar 25, 2012 2:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Simple Minded

Re: Occupy the Globe

Post by Simple Minded »

Zack Morris wrote:
Mr. Perfect wrote:http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/ ... QF20120323
"If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon," Obama said in his first comments about the shooting, acknowledging the racial element in the case.
Hmm Barack, who's child does Zimmerman look like, I wonder.
Leave it to the GOP to turn a moment of honest empathy into "despicable" "race baiting". Politically correct drama queens.
Obama has joined the GOP? Wow! Where was the MSM on that one?

I do agree with the assessment of PCDQ (me be the first to coin that Acronym)!!!!

Politics without drama queens is soooooooo boring.

I wonder if Zimmerman will get invited to the White House for a beer summit...... that usually seems to quiet the startled herd... though it might not be a good precedent to set....

ooops.... too late.
User avatar
monster_gardener
Posts: 5334
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 12:36 am
Location: Trolla. Land of upside down trees and tomatos........

Gray Goose Shafts earn respect.......

Post by monster_gardener »

Ibrahim wrote:
Demon of Undoing wrote:
I don't know how you would measure this. What are the guiding statistics? Anecdotal evidence ("man shoots robber" headlines, etc) don't get us anywhere. If you and I pass one another on the street, and we safer if we are both armed? Neither armed? One of us armed? It's like some medieval logic problem that can be argued equally well from any side.
Doesn't even go to statistics, but general principles. If you and I are both legally armed and behaving legally, not only do I have nothing to fear, but I welcome your presence. If you are armed, but not so lawful, then I am absolutely the better off for having the option to be armed, too. I can be, as a law abiding citizen, disarmed. As a practical matter, Outlaw Ibrahim can not. More choices+ more capability is almost never a bad thing. Well, at least, for me. But what is good for me ain't necessarily good for a regular human bein'.
I look at it as a probability game. There is a chance of either of us defending ourselves against a deadly attack with our firearms. But there is also a chance of one of us misunderstanding a situation and using our firearms when we didn't need to, or both of us turning them on each other under some misapprehension that the other is acting aggressively (then responding the firearms, which actually do denote aggression), thereby escalating the situation. Not to mention straight up accidents (comedy scenarios where ppl shoot themselves in the asscheek or foot), plus accidentally shooting people we didn't mean to shoot, family members accidentally shooting themselves with our guns, etc.

Now, all of these things are avoidable, and some are more likely than others. But if we don't have firearms to begin with then they are impossible by definition. Then we are reduced to the one scenario where this is disadvantageous: the scenario in which somebody wanted to commit violence against us or our home/family.
This actually raises another problematic social issue. We can agree that guns themselves don't bring safety and security, but guns in the hands of "certain people." The model of "responsible gun owners" as opposed to "gang bangers" other other undesirables is inevitably going to have racial and socio-economic overlaps that have even more distressing implications.
I don't see the problem. I don't want to take guns out of anybody's hands except those the law does not allow to have them. A gang banger that I want disarmed has exactly the same profile as Barney Fife wannabes with a conviction for felony theft- they broke the law. Until Upgradd( with two D's, for a double dose of the pimping) is convicted of a felony, he's just a dude presumed innocent. I shoot with these guys sometimes, give them tips. Black people with A's hats and hoodies deserve to be able to legally defend themselves, too. Hell, they are more likely to need it than I.
But the supposition that those people are potential gang bangers is widely held. Moreover, people who live in communities with high levels of gang violence tend to have a hostile attitude towards guns generally. I don't know how that relates to the idea that more guns make people safer.

My understanding of events is that Zimmerman didn't pull his weapon until his interrogation had escalated into a fight, which he might have been getting the worse of. This is why his self-defense legal position may work. He provoked a fight, started to lose it, and on the basis that he thought he might get killed by this black youth, gunned him down. If he approached weapon-up that would be another matter again. Florida law allows for more subtlety in determining his intent and frame of mind, which ultimately means who the jury finds sympathetic.

Really it's Zimmerman's bad luck for shooting a relatively spotless character. If he'd shot an innocent black youth who, say, had a marijuana arrest or was dropout, he'd have a much better chance of getting off. If we was an actual cop he'd definitely walk, maybe lose his job at best. These are the vagaries that influence criminal trials.
My understanding was that he was under suspension. That may suffice. This is the 21st century, after all.
Who was suspended from what?

Generally, to shoot an unarmed person, there has to be significant disparity of force. Shooting because you are losing a fight ( especially one you started or reasonably could have avoided) is not going to be cleared. The conflict is if he can show a reasonable fear to a jury, as you say. I don't think he can win that.
I agree. But as I understand the Florida law, if the Zimmerman team can convince the jury that he was certain his life was in danger then using his firearm is justified. Now I think that's an uphill battle, and the jury pool is probably badly tainted against this guy nationwide, but the possibility is there.
Thank you Very Much for your post, Ibrahim.......
Now, all of these things are avoidable, and some are more likely than others. But if we don't have firearms to begin with then they are impossible by definition. Then we are reduced to the one scenario where this is disadvantageous: the scenario in which somebody wanted to commit violence against us or our home/family.
Doesn't have to be firearms.......

In Japan, Hideyoshi confiscated edged weapons.......

And "peace" prevailed........... Wonderful :twisted: .......... Unless you were a peasant or lower (artisan, merchant etc.) who happened to get it the way of a Samurai......... Kirusiti Gomen: Cutting and Going.........OFF WITH YOUR HEAD..........

Ended up with a situation where asking for a reduction in the 90% tax rate would cost you your head.........

No thanks........ Situation in England a bit better........ Boss had to take into account that the yeoman archers he needed to fight against the French or Scots could also put a gray goose shaft in his back if oppressed too much........
For the love of G_d, consider you & I may be mistaken.
Orion Must Rise: Killer Space Rocks Coming Our way
The Best Laid Plans of Men, Monkeys & Pigs Oft Go Awry
Woe to those who long for the Day of the Lord, for It is Darkness, Not Light
Demon of Undoing
Posts: 1764
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 8:14 pm

Re: Occupy the Globe

Post by Demon of Undoing »

Ibrahim

The flaw in the logic is the hypothesis where neither of us is armed. This is the US. There is no practical way to disarm to the level required. In that light, more options for a law abiding citizen is better.
Ibrahim
Posts: 6524
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 2:06 am

Re: Occupy the Globe

Post by Ibrahim »

Demon of Undoing wrote:Ibrahim

The flaw in the logic is the hypothesis where neither of us is armed. This is the US. There is no practical way to disarm to the level required. In that light, more options for a law abiding citizen is better.
Wasn't suggesting laws to disarm people, I was looking at it more from the individual perspective. I.e. are you and I specifically safer if we personally choose to carry firearms (or not).

Legally curtailing gun ownership in the US is a dead letter. There is no political juice for it outside of arch-liberal enclaves like San Francisco.
User avatar
Carbizene
Posts: 450
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2011 4:41 am

Re: Occupy the Globe

Post by Carbizene »

If I was in the UZ I would be pretty keen on curtailing gun calibre/magazine coz y'all gonna end up using them on each other sometime soon.
Demon of Undoing
Posts: 1764
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 8:14 pm

Re: Occupy the Globe

Post by Demon of Undoing »

Carbizene wrote:If I was in the UZ I would be pretty keen on curtailing gun calibre/magazine coz y'all gonna end up using them on each other sometime soon.
Well, not that other teams haven't had their turn, but it has always been thus. Don't forget that our worst war was with ourselves. Now, owing to the decentralized nature of tech and ideas, it's blue measles on a map intertwined with red measles, and a whole range of colors delineating various interests that do the connecting.

Tribal warfare in the Sudan got nothing on what could yet cone.
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Occupy the Globe

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Carbizene wrote:If I was in the UZ I would be pretty keen on curtailing gun calibre/magazine coz y'all gonna end up using them on each other sometime soon.
That's exactly why I need huge magazines.

BTW, Democrats really don't have guns, so it should work out ok.

:)
Censorship isn't necessary
Demon of Undoing
Posts: 1764
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 8:14 pm

Re: Occupy the Globe

Post by Demon of Undoing »

Mr. Perfect wrote:
Carbizene wrote:If I was in the UZ I would be pretty keen on curtailing gun calibre/magazine coz y'all gonna end up using them on each other sometime soon.
That's exactly why I need huge magazines.

BTW, Democrats really don't have guns, so it should work out ok.

:)
Have you seen the new Surefire 60- and 100- round coffin mags? Much more manageable than a C- mag.


Sorry.
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Occupy the Globe

Post by Mr. Perfect »

Mr. Perfect wrote:
Ibrahim wrote: I agree. But as I understand the Florida law, if the Zimmerman team can convince the jury that he was certain his life was in danger then using his firearm is justified.
Ibrahim, I wonder if you would be able to cite the state code, the text, that gives you this impression.
No takers on this then? No way to back up that impression?

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/ind ... /0776.html
Censorship isn't necessary
User avatar
monster_gardener
Posts: 5334
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2011 12:36 am
Location: Trolla. Land of upside down trees and tomatos........

Pettifogging Zimmerman.........

Post by monster_gardener »

Mr. Perfect wrote:
Mr. Perfect wrote:
Ibrahim wrote: I agree. But as I understand the Florida law, if the Zimmerman team can convince the jury that he was certain his life was in danger then using his firearm is justified.
Ibrahim, I wonder if you would be able to cite the state code, the text, that gives you this impression.
No takers on this then? No way to back up that impression?

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/ind ... /0776.html
Thank you Very Much for your post, Mr. Perfect.

Thank you for the link.

AIUI

IMVHO Ibrahim may be correct DESPITE what the law code says.......

All that is needed is for his lawyers to convince 1 member of the jury............

Reason Lawyers are sometimes called PetitFoggers........

Sometimes good.......... Sometimes for ill.........

Might have to do it more than once........

Might still get nailed in civil court......... Where AIUI only a preponderance of the evidence is necessary..........

But still get away with it.........

Remembering Emmet Till.........

and others.......

FWIW, I heard on the news (FOX) that the KKK is strong in the Sanford area........


I am not a lawyer so if I got this wrong.............say on...........
For the love of G_d, consider you & I may be mistaken.
Orion Must Rise: Killer Space Rocks Coming Our way
The Best Laid Plans of Men, Monkeys & Pigs Oft Go Awry
Woe to those who long for the Day of the Lord, for It is Darkness, Not Light
Post Reply