Gun Control & RKBA

X_Digger

(18,585 posts)

87. If we'd likely be in the same place, it's irrelevant. n/t

Reply to OrwellwasRight (Reply #86)

Tue Apr 3, 2012, 10:53 AM

Apr 2012

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

107 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

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