Reply #68

In the discussion thread: Ann Coulter States SYG Laws Have Nothing To Do With Zimmerman Situation [View all]

Mon Apr 2, 2012, 02:27 PM

PavePusher (15,374 posts)

68. Trying to pull elitism, here?

If you can't discuss the law with laymen.... something may be wrong with the lawyer or the law. Explain the concepts for the average person and don't just say "You couldn't possibly understand".

Reply to this post

Back to OP Alert abuse Link to post in-thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

107 replies	Author	Time	Post
Ann Coulter States SYG Laws Have Nothing To Do With Zimmerman Situation [View all]	fightthegoodfightnow	Apr 2012	OP
on this point,	Voice for Peace	Apr 2012	#1
I don't think SYG has anything to do with this particular case.	russspeakeasy	Apr 2012	#2
No.	rrneck	Apr 2012	#3
The only way the SYG law would have applied	tularetom	Apr 2012	#4
SYG only applies to Trayvon Martin.	aquart	Apr 2012	#5
Problem is that Zimmerman is using SYG laws as his defense	HockeyMom	Apr 2012	#6
How do you know, for a fact, he's using SYG as a defense? Are you inside his	shadowrider	Apr 2012	#17
He's using "self-defense" and so far it has worked. Further, most folks like Zimmerman only	Hoyt	Apr 2012	#27
"Self-defense" is a far cry from SYG.	shadowrider	Apr 2012	#63
"Zimmerman was not acting in self-defense..."	discntnt_irny_srcsm	Apr 2012	#33
+1000	HockeyMom	Apr 2012	#40
Sanford, FL	discntnt_irny_srcsm	Apr 2012	#46
You didn't answer the question.	AtheistCrusader	Apr 2012	#82
I'm not sure the law sees it that way.	Straw Man	Apr 2012	#47
That may be but...	discntnt_irny_srcsm	Apr 2012	#50
I mostly agree.	Straw Man	Apr 2012	#58
And other criminals attempt to use the fourth, fifth, or first amendment as their defense.	X_Digger	Apr 2012	#76
I'll skate around this	gejohnston	Apr 2012	#7
From the St. Pete Times today	teach1st	Apr 2012	#8
it sounds like	gejohnston	Apr 2012	#10
More than one or two	teach1st	Apr 2012	#14
the old law	gejohnston	Apr 2012	#18
She's wrong.	OrwellwasRight	Apr 2012	#9
I don't think so	gejohnston	Apr 2012	#11
Yes, I have heard this meme.	OrwellwasRight	Apr 2012	#13
the same way	gejohnston	Apr 2012	#15
Not true.	OrwellwasRight	Apr 2012	#16
not always	gejohnston	Apr 2012	#19
So they are prohibited from owning guns not from being a person.	OrwellwasRight	Apr 2012	#25
I didn't create the term	gejohnston	Apr 2012	#29
Yes, but that was actually the main problem with the old law.	eqfan592	Apr 2012	#20
"The baby out with the bathwater" assumes the law is good.	OrwellwasRight	Apr 2012	#24
you don't get it	gejohnston	Apr 2012	#26
People like you should not make assumptions about people like me.	OrwellwasRight	Apr 2012	#31
people like me?	gejohnston	Apr 2012	#34
Yes, people "like you"	OrwellwasRight	Apr 2012	#39
The old law isn't "ass backward" as you suggest	COLGATE4	Apr 2012	#30
Insanity and self defense are two extremely different situations.	eqfan592	Apr 2012	#38
The homicide is not "justifiable" until it has been proved so.	OrwellwasRight	Apr 2012	#42
Are you saying this is how the law is under the SYG laws?	eqfan592	Apr 2012	#48
No, you were responding to Colgate4's post on the "old laws"	OrwellwasRight	Apr 2012	#74
I really should have known better	COLGATE4	Apr 2012	#65
Trying to pull elitism, here?	PavePusher	Apr 2012	#68
I explained the law to the layman. He wasn't happy with the	COLGATE4	Apr 2012	#69
There is an "agree" or "disagree" on how just the law is.	eqfan592	Apr 2012	#70
There's really no 'agree' or disagree' here. We're not voting	COLGATE4	Apr 2012	#71
lol, peace out man.	eqfan592	Apr 2012	#75
This message was self-deleted by its author	X_Digger	Apr 2012	#79
No, you're wrong.	AtheistCrusader	Apr 2012	#52
Um, no. She is wrong.	OrwellwasRight	Apr 2012	#72
Reading is fundamental.	AtheistCrusader	Apr 2012	#81
The fact that it has been "leveraged" makes it relevant.	OrwellwasRight	Apr 2012	#83
That doesn't imply empathy at all.	AtheistCrusader	Apr 2012	#88
What you cite as facts are merely your version:	OrwellwasRight	Apr 2012	#89
You made no allowance for a misunderstanding.	AtheistCrusader	Apr 2012	#92
1) I did not say	OrwellwasRight	Apr 2012	#95
No.	AtheistCrusader	Apr 2012	#99
I ignore an incorrect definition of "relevant"	OrwellwasRight	Apr 2012	#100
And.	AtheistCrusader	Apr 2012	#103
No, Zimmerman would have just changed his story..	X_Digger	Apr 2012	#78
Of course the state would still be checking evidence.	OrwellwasRight	Apr 2012	#84
Does a racist / corrupt PD need an excuse to not do their jobs?	X_Digger	Apr 2012	#85
That does not prove non-relevance.	OrwellwasRight	Apr 2012	#86
If we'd likely be in the same place, it's irrelevant. n/t	X_Digger	Apr 2012	#87
No, that is not the test for relevance.	OrwellwasRight	Apr 2012	#90
We're not in court, counselor.	X_Digger	Apr 2012	#91
Nope.	OrwellwasRight	Apr 2012	#93
'connection with the matter at hand' - if absent, we'd be in the same place -- no connection. n/t	X_Digger	Apr 2012	#94
That is not what "connection" means.	OrwellwasRight	Apr 2012	#97
I'm not arguing with the dictionary, counselor.	X_Digger	Apr 2012	#98
Yes, if there were a law that allowed you to shoot others while wearing a dress.	OrwellwasRight	Apr 2012	#101
There's no lack of amusement to laugh at.	X_Digger	Apr 2012	#102
Wow. Just Sad.	OrwellwasRight	Apr 2012	#104
Oh I plan to.	X_Digger	Apr 2012	#105
If Annthrax told me the sun rose in the east,.....	lastlib	Apr 2012	#12
you would actually pay attention	gejohnston	Apr 2012	#22
Only the antis are hooked into believing this shooting was SYG related.	ileus	Apr 2012	#21
Anyone who doesn't see SYG as the issue is in denial	Starboard Tack	Apr 2012	#23
Zimmerman is hiding behind SYG.	discntnt_irny_srcsm	Apr 2012	#32
Yes, the fact that it leads to more people suffering a violent death.	Starboard Tack	Apr 2012	#35
I ask gently and with respect...	discntnt_irny_srcsm	Apr 2012	#36
Sure	Starboard Tack	Apr 2012	#37
However...	discntnt_irny_srcsm	Apr 2012	#44
Soooooo,	rrneck	Apr 2012	#45
Not in your home, necessarily	Starboard Tack	Apr 2012	#55
You failed to address the issue at hand.	rrneck	Apr 2012	#56
See post 52. Read the statute. Read the responding officer's statement.	AtheistCrusader	Apr 2012	#53
We shall see	Starboard Tack	Apr 2012	#54
Not true.	AtheistCrusader	Apr 2012	#61
What physical evidence?	Starboard Tack	Apr 2012	#66
All things not apparently in evidence.	AtheistCrusader	Apr 2012	#67
Are you a DU member who agrees with Ann Coulter and if so why?	discntnt_irny_srcsm	Apr 2012	#28
If Zimmerman was the aggressor, the instigator, then he cannot claim self-defense, period, unless...	krispos42	Apr 2012	#41
The fact is he IS claiming so.	OrwellwasRight	Apr 2012	#43
And I'm a 6'2" bodybuilder/former Navy SEAL who stole three bars of gold from Osama's hideout...	krispos42	Apr 2012	#51
All your posturing aside,	OrwellwasRight	Apr 2012	#73
"That is your interpretation of proper application of the law"	AtheistCrusader	Apr 2012	#106
not qualified:	OrwellwasRight	Apr 2012	#107
NAACP makes the same claim.	GreenStormCloud	Apr 2012	#49
No witnesses has everything to do with this, SYG has nothing to do with it..	pipoman	Apr 2012	#57
Without witnesses under the old law it would be hard to prove that Zimmerman acted incorrectly ...	spin	Apr 2012	#59
Just wondering...	discntnt_irny_srcsm	Apr 2012	#60
I am not sure what coulter has to do with anything? If it is 1pm and she says it is, and I agree,	The Straight Story	Apr 2012	#62
The right-wing just loves to inject the SYG into the debate because it deflects away from Zimmerman	GreydeeThos	Apr 2012	#64
Zimmerman wasn't standing his ground.	BiggJawn	Apr 2012	#77
nice dialogue you got going here	Tuesday Afternoon	Apr 2012	#80
I thought that Z. or some law enforcement officials claimed SYG and left him go. Looks like he	AlinPA	Apr 2012	#96

Edit History

Please login to view edit histories.