Author Topic: Trayvon Martin  (Read 1642 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +105/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #29 on: March 27, 2012, 08:37:22 PM »
I don't remember passing any laws here in the UK and I'm fairly certain the American people didn't pass those laws themselves. I've yet to speak to an American who is a Bona Fide gun nut, I did get to speak to an Australian one on here though.

No. They just vote for those that do.

This particular law was something specific to Florida and as far as stand your ground law's go its the most 'loose' examples of this kind of law.  The law was passed in 2005 under much criticism, such as the idea that it might lead to instances were people murder each other out of hand and the only person that can claim self defense is the one that lives.  Conservatives mocked critics who pointed out this very thing before the law passed and since the law has passed there have been dozens of such cases ( Trayvon martin is not the only example ).

The law is so vague that it allows whomever happens to live and kills first, to be the one who was defending themselves.  The aggressor or any build up to the incident is irrelevant.  Current conservatives in the state can't make up their mind as to whether or not the law doesn't apply in this case or if they should support efforts to change it.. which would require them to be on the same side as democrats.

Btw I am a gun owner.
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me

Offline Seppuku

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3855
  • Darwins +125/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • I am gay for Fred Phelps
    • Seppuku Arts
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #30 on: March 27, 2012, 08:39:34 PM »
I don't remember passing any laws here in the UK and I'm fairly certain the American people didn't pass those laws themselves. I've yet to speak to an American who is a Bona Fide gun nut, I did get to speak to an Australian one on here though.

No. They just vote for those that do.

Just like we voted for David Cameron and Nick Clegg, but also Tony Blair before that (Gordy was unelected so I'll leave him out)...so really it's our fault we're in a fucked up economic climate and ridiculous cuts to our public funding are being made and unemployment is stupidly high?

I wasn't old enough to vote for Tony Blair, so thanks a lot for the Iraq war you murderous bastards.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2012, 08:42:03 PM by Seppuku »
“It is difficult to understand the universe if you only study one planet” - Miyamoto Musashi
Warning: I occassionally forget to proofread my posts to spot typos or to spot poor editing.

Online Dante

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2204
  • Darwins +72/-9
  • Gender: Male
  • Hedonist Extraordinaire
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #31 on: March 27, 2012, 08:50:01 PM »
So, Frank, would you, or would you not use deadly force to defend yourself or your family?

If you say yes, would you or would you not expect to be convicted of murder?
Actually it doesn't. One could conceivably be all-powerful but not exceptionally intelligent.

Offline Frank

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2363
  • Darwins +38/-20
  • Gender: Male
  • You're doin' my head in!!
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #32 on: March 27, 2012, 08:52:46 PM »
I don't remember passing any laws here in the UK and I'm fairly certain the American people didn't pass those laws themselves. I've yet to speak to an American who is a Bona Fide gun nut, I did get to speak to an Australian one on here though.

No. They just vote for those that do.

Just like we voted for David Cameron and Nick Clegg, but also Tony Blair before that (Gordy was unelected so I'll leave him out)...so really it's our fault we're in a fucked up economic climate and ridiculous cuts to our public funding are being made and unemployment is stupidly high?

I wasn't old enough to vote for Tony Blair, so thanks a lot for the Iraq war you murderous bastards.

What's this got to do with it? I don't remember the present government passing any shoot first ask questions later laws and there was no Iraq war when Blair got elected.

A young man has been shot dead, a mother will bury her son for no other reason than his murderer felt threatened and apparently that's all the defense he needs. No other country in the western world would allow this. but as usual America is different. Must be that exceptionalism we're always hearing about.
"Atheism is not a mission to convert the world. It only seems that way because when other religions fall away, atheism is what is left behind".

Offline Frank

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2363
  • Darwins +38/-20
  • Gender: Male
  • You're doin' my head in!!
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #33 on: March 27, 2012, 08:55:35 PM »
So, Frank, would you, or would you not use deadly force to defend yourself or your family?

If you say yes, would you or would you not expect to be convicted of murder?

Do one. You're an idiot. If you want to live in paranoiaville suit yourself.
"Atheism is not a mission to convert the world. It only seems that way because when other religions fall away, atheism is what is left behind".

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +105/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #34 on: March 27, 2012, 09:01:03 PM »
So, Frank, would you, or would you not use deadly force to defend yourself or your family?

If you say yes, would you or would you not expect to be convicted of murder?

Do one. You're an idiot. If you want to live in paranoiaville suit yourself.

It was a perfectly valid question, meant to determine as to what qualification for defending oneself you're willing to entertain.  The law in question is horrible, but just because a law is poorly written that in itself doesn't mean that any comparable notion of defending oneself is at odds with rationality or insane.  You're offering incredibly loaded and hyperbolic language, while being incredibly dismissive.
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me

Offline Frank

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2363
  • Darwins +38/-20
  • Gender: Male
  • You're doin' my head in!!
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #35 on: March 27, 2012, 09:09:44 PM »


It was a perfectly valid question, meant to determine as to what qualification for defending oneself you're willing to entertain.  The law in question is horrible, but just because a law is poorly written that in itself doesn't mean that any comparable notion of defending oneself is at odds with rationality or insane.  You're offering incredibly loaded and hyperbolic language, while being incredibly dismissive.

It was not a valid question it was a leading question. We are not taliking about defending families here we are talking about killing people in the street. Mr Zimmermans family was not under any threat from anyone. There are people here who are actually justifying murder as an excuse for the guns they own and probably carry in public themselves.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2012, 09:12:29 PM by Frank »
"Atheism is not a mission to convert the world. It only seems that way because when other religions fall away, atheism is what is left behind".

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +105/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #36 on: March 27, 2012, 09:12:52 PM »
It was a perfectly valid question, meant to determine as to what qualification for defending oneself you're willing to entertain.  The law in question is horrible, but just because a law is poorly written that in itself doesn't mean that any comparable notion of defending oneself is at odds with rationality or insane.  You're offering incredibly loaded and hyperbolic language, while being incredibly dismissive.

It was not a valid question it was a leading question. We are not taliking about defending families here we are talking about killing people in the street.

We are also talking about self defense, laws specific to florida, and the rationality/irrationality therein.  It's virtually impossible to separate the subjects.  Asking about the other subjects that are part of this overall discussion is within reason.

Quote
Mr Zimmermans family was not under any threat from anyone. There are people here who are actually justifying murder as an excuse for the guns they own and probably carry in public themselves.

I'm sorry, who is justifying anything?

All you're doing is mindlessly ranting and attacking an exaggerated stereotype about American gun laws.  The situation is horrible, we all get it and no one is 'justifying' murdering someone else.
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me

Offline Frank

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2363
  • Darwins +38/-20
  • Gender: Male
  • You're doin' my head in!!
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #37 on: March 27, 2012, 09:18:53 PM »
I see my negative darwins have suddenly gone up. Always does when I air my opinion of US gun laws, or more accurately lack thereof.

Here's one "Yes, we get it, you hate America. STFU already."

Apparently complaining because an american was murdered means I hate america. Talk about reverse logic.
"Atheism is not a mission to convert the world. It only seems that way because when other religions fall away, atheism is what is left behind".

Offline Frank

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2363
  • Darwins +38/-20
  • Gender: Male
  • You're doin' my head in!!
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #38 on: March 27, 2012, 09:26:12 PM »


We are also talking about self defense, laws specific to florida, and the rationality/irrationality therein.  It's virtually impossible to separate the subjects.  Asking about the other subjects that are part of this overall discussion is within reason.



no we are not just talking about Florida. These laws exist in 23 states. From Screwtapes link. This situation is only getting worse. Just read the links and stop moaning at me.

"Atheism is not a mission to convert the world. It only seems that way because when other religions fall away, atheism is what is left behind".

Online jetson

  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 7276
  • Darwins +170/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Meet George Jetson!
    • Jet Blog
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #39 on: March 27, 2012, 09:26:31 PM »
So, Frank, would you, or would you not use deadly force to defend yourself or your family?

If you say yes, would you or would you not expect to be convicted of murder?

Do one. You're an idiot. If you want to live in paranoiaville suit yourself.

Frank, you can do better than this though.  Even if you believe the question is misleading, or off topic.  Notice, it included "yourself", not just your family.

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +105/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #40 on: March 27, 2012, 09:29:40 PM »
no we are not just talking about Florida

I already stated that these laws exist elsewhere.  In fact, I specifically stated that the Stand your ground law in Florida is the least detailed and most 'open' of any examples of this type of law.

You need to relax, because you're not paying attention to the posts and you're even imagining people to argue in favor of positions that they are not.
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me

Offline Frank

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2363
  • Darwins +38/-20
  • Gender: Male
  • You're doin' my head in!!
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #41 on: March 27, 2012, 09:37:15 PM »

Well let me put it to you this way. I wouldn't hang around my neighbourhood at night with a gun waiting to accost anyone I didn't actually know personally and then shoot them because they told me to fuck off, but apparently people over there do and it's all perfectly legal in 24 states.
.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2012, 09:39:27 PM by Frank »
"Atheism is not a mission to convert the world. It only seems that way because when other religions fall away, atheism is what is left behind".

Offline Seppuku

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3855
  • Darwins +125/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • I am gay for Fred Phelps
    • Seppuku Arts
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #42 on: March 27, 2012, 09:39:04 PM »
Quote
What's this got to do with it? I don't remember the present government passing any shoot first ask questions later laws and there was no Iraq war when Blair got elected.

A young man has been shot dead, a mother will bury her son for no other reason than his murderer felt threatened and apparently that's all the defense he needs. No other country in the western world would allow this. but as usual America is different. Must be that exceptionalism we're always hearing about.

No but Blair got us into the Iraq War. How many people had to bury their children or parents, aunts and uncles or their closest friends or brothers and sisters because our governments thought it was a good idea? Our government was just as guilty as the US government for getting involved.

However, I don't see the death of someone as an excuse for a bit of casual racism.

Quote
It was not a valid question it was a leading question. We are not taliking about defending families here we are talking about killing people in the street. Mr Zimmermans family was not under any threat from anyone. There are people here who are actually justifying murder as an excuse for the guns they own and probably carry in public themselves.

But some of your criticisms were around gun law and a part of the discussion is self defence. He wanted to see how far you would go. Whilst I disagree with the US's gun laws and think some of them are absolutely ludicrous, I still think it's a valid question. I know the answer I'd give, however, I wasn't the one being asked the question. ;)


Quote from: Frank
Apparently complaining because an american was murdered means I hate america. Talk about reverse logic.

You go around having a go at Americans for their guns laws, put them in a position of responsibility for this murder. So in your usual fashion you passionately berate Americans when the opportunity arises.

I suspect that was the point.

Basically:
Quote from: Frank
You're living in a immoral sewer. You pass laws that actually allow people to shoot dead other people without fear of punishment. Is it possible to go any lower than that?

Why don't you just put aside one day a year, you could call it kill day. During that twenty four hours, which would be televised and points awarded for the best kill, anyone would be allowed to shoot dead anyone else they see on the street, since quite plainly you americans won't be happy until you get to kill at least one other human being with those guns you so lovingly care about.

Yay lets pass the blame onto a race of people and use overgeneralised American stereotypes to berate them!



Yes, it's a fucked up situation, but I think "yo America, you're fucked up" isn't actually addressing why these sorts of things happen. America is in no position to abolish their gun laws. It'd be a logistical nightmare where the guns are still in the hands of the wrong people. It doesn't make it right and I think something ought to be done to reduce the number of guns owned with 'self defence' in mind (I say that because people go hunting and here in the UK you can own a gun for hunting, in fact, such guns have been used for murder) and maybe one day those laws could be abolished.

Yes, even certain specific gun laws are ridiculous and don't need to exist and if this guy really felt he just attacked in self defence, why would he pursue him? Like many who commit a crime they're trying to pass the responsibility. Would the crime still have been committed if the specific gun related law didn't exist? Who knows? Also, what also needs to be addressed is why he'd want to shoot the guy in the first place. I am sure lax gun laws is only a part of the issue and also address what can be done, such as what puts people in a position where they commit violent crime in the first place. I'm sure 'owning a gun' isn't the reason.
“It is difficult to understand the universe if you only study one planet” - Miyamoto Musashi
Warning: I occassionally forget to proofread my posts to spot typos or to spot poor editing.

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +105/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #43 on: March 27, 2012, 09:42:30 PM »
Well let me put it to you this way. I wouldn't hang around my neighbourhood at night with a gun waiting to accost anyone I didn't actually know personally and then shoot them because they told me to fuck off, but apparently people over there do and it's all perfectly legal in 24 states.

It is not perfectly legal in 24 states; The law in florida is actually the most vague of the available examples of these laws, it does not define or identify an aggressor nor whether or not one needs to demonstrate an inability to leave the situation.  Your statement is simply false at face value.
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +105/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #44 on: March 27, 2012, 09:46:51 PM »
For example, here is a similar law from Illinois:

Quote
Sec. 7-4. Use of force by aggressor. The justification described in the preceding Sections of this Article is not available to a person who:

    (a) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
    (b) Initially provokes the use of force against himself, with the intent to use such force as an excuse to inflict bodily harm upon the assailant; or
    (c) Otherwise initially provokes the use of force against himself, unless:

        (1) Such force is so great that he reasonably believes that he is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm, and that he has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
        (2) In good faith, he withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.

This wording specifically addresses whether or not the aggressor initiates or provokes the force against himself.  Similar wording does not exist in the Florida law and all of these laws are not necessarily the 'same'.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand-your-ground_law#Illinois
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me

Online jetson

  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 7276
  • Darwins +170/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Meet George Jetson!
    • Jet Blog
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #45 on: March 27, 2012, 09:47:09 PM »

Well let me put it to you this way. I wouldn't hang around my neighbourhood at night with a gun waiting to accost anyone I didn't actually know personally and then shoot them because they told me to f**k off, but apparently people over there do and it's all perfectly legal in 24 states.
.

I wouldn't either, and neither would most Americans.  This case outlines the unfortunate law that exists in Florida, and points out how badly it could be abused.  It also, in my opinion, reflects a certain sector of the American public, but not Americans as a whole.  I believe we collectively condemn this killing, and the law that is so far allowing it to stand.

Online Dante

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2204
  • Darwins +72/-9
  • Gender: Male
  • Hedonist Extraordinaire
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #46 on: March 27, 2012, 09:48:03 PM »
And you still haven't answered my questions, Frank. You're dodging. I suspect because the self defense answers are more complicated than you'd care to admit.
Actually it doesn't. One could conceivably be all-powerful but not exceptionally intelligent.

Offline Frank

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2363
  • Darwins +38/-20
  • Gender: Male
  • You're doin' my head in!!
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #47 on: March 27, 2012, 09:51:33 PM »
I am sure lax gun laws is only a part of the issue and also address what can be done, such as what puts people in a position where they commit violent crime in the first place. I'm sure 'owning a gun' isn't the reason.

Lax gun laws are the only reason. if other countries, including my own, had such lax laws then we would be in the same boat unless you are saying americans are more violent than everyone else. Easy access to guns is the foremost cause of this kind of thing by a mile. Do you think this guy would have been out on the street at night with a club in his hand? Not a chance. He had a gun. The power of life and death right there in his hand. I'll bet he's waited a long time for just this situation to arise. A chance to kill and get away with it. He wasn't going to pass it up.
"Atheism is not a mission to convert the world. It only seems that way because when other religions fall away, atheism is what is left behind".

Offline Frank

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2363
  • Darwins +38/-20
  • Gender: Male
  • You're doin' my head in!!
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #48 on: March 27, 2012, 09:55:23 PM »

Well let me put it to you this way. I wouldn't hang around my neighbourhood at night with a gun waiting to accost anyone I didn't actually know personally and then shoot them because they told me to f**k off, but apparently people over there do and it's all perfectly legal in 24 states.
.

I wouldn't either, and neither would most Americans.  This case outlines the unfortunate law that exists in Florida, and points out how badly it could be abused.  It also, in my opinion, reflects a certain sector of the American public, but not Americans as a whole.  I believe we collectively condemn this killing, and the law that is so far allowing it to stand.

And how big is this section then? A minority or majority?
"Atheism is not a mission to convert the world. It only seems that way because when other religions fall away, atheism is what is left behind".

Online ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6465
  • Darwins +769/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Hide and Seek World Champion since 1958!
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #49 on: March 27, 2012, 10:08:37 PM »
This will mess with your head Frank. I've lived in this country for all of my sixty years (well, not counting my time in the Air Force) and I've never owned a gun, never wanted a gun, never needed a gun and never wished I had one. Not counting my time in the military, I have shot small caliber rifles exactly twice, and neither time thrilled me.

This despite the fact that for a time I lived in a neighborhood where the minority was a majority and where black kids would buy Skittles.

Generalize all you want, but keep in mind there are tons of exceptions. We have plenty of flaws, but the dead black kids are byproducts of far worse problems than guns.
Not everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They're all entitled to mine though.

Online Dante

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2204
  • Darwins +72/-9
  • Gender: Male
  • Hedonist Extraordinaire
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #50 on: March 27, 2012, 10:10:48 PM »
All of the outcry over this particular event suggests that the majority of us gun loving Americans find this situation reprehensible. Hopefully, this particular law is rescinded, and justice will prevail.
Actually it doesn't. One could conceivably be all-powerful but not exceptionally intelligent.

Offline Frank

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2363
  • Darwins +38/-20
  • Gender: Male
  • You're doin' my head in!!
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #51 on: March 27, 2012, 10:14:10 PM »


Generalize all you want, but keep in mind there are tons of exceptions. We have plenty of flaws, but the dead black kids are byproducts of far worse problems than guns.

I would maintain if you had less guns you would have less dead kids of any colour.
"Atheism is not a mission to convert the world. It only seems that way because when other religions fall away, atheism is what is left behind".

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +105/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #52 on: March 27, 2012, 10:15:59 PM »
I've been around for 32 years; I've owned 16 firearms, I got married and now I have 2.  To quell any fears that I'm a gun nut, I inherited that large number of firearms.  I've hunted, used a firearm for protection ( wild animals ), for hobby shooting, and to secure my own home.  I do not have a permit to carry one in public, nor do I desire one.  I typically support most if not all gun control laws.

I grew up with guns.
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +105/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #53 on: March 27, 2012, 10:17:06 PM »
I would maintain if you had less guns you would have less dead kids of any colour.

Only by the extension that the lack of easier access to a lethal weapon would decrease the number, not necessarily for the reason that the intention to harm others is based on the availability of a lethal weapon.
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me

Offline Frank

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2363
  • Darwins +38/-20
  • Gender: Male
  • You're doin' my head in!!
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #54 on: March 27, 2012, 10:22:25 PM »
I would maintain if you had less guns you would have less dead kids of any colour.

Only by the extension that the lack of easier access to a lethal weapon would decrease the number, not necessarily for the reason that the intention to harm others is based on the availability of a lethal weapon.

The intention is irrelevant if you don't have the means. Guns are the easiest and most effective method to cause a lot of harm to a lot of people in a short amount of time unless you know how to make a bomb which most people don't. You can't change peoples intentions but you can take away their means of carrying it out.
"Atheism is not a mission to convert the world. It only seems that way because when other religions fall away, atheism is what is left behind".

Offline Frank

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2363
  • Darwins +38/-20
  • Gender: Male
  • You're doin' my head in!!
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #55 on: March 27, 2012, 10:34:21 PM »
I've been around for 32 years; I've owned 16 firearms, I got married and now I have 2.  To quell any fears that I'm a gun nut, I inherited that large number of firearms.  I've hunted, used a firearm for protection ( wild animals ), for hobby shooting, and to secure my own home.  I do not have a permit to carry one in public, nor do I desire one.  I typically support most if not all gun control laws.

I grew up with guns.

Well I've been around for 57 years and I've never owned any sort of gun because it's illegal and I don't think someone is going to murder in my bed.

What if they brought in a law that said you couldn't have a gun anymore. Would you support that?
"Atheism is not a mission to convert the world. It only seems that way because when other religions fall away, atheism is what is left behind".

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +105/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #56 on: March 27, 2012, 10:35:14 PM »
Only by the extension that the lack of easier access to a lethal weapon would decrease the number, not necessarily for the reason that the intention to harm others is based on the availability of a lethal weapon.

The intention is irrelevant if you don't have the means.

An african american man was dragged behind a truck that several white males tied him too.  His body was torn and scattered all over the backwoods.  ( this happened in tx some years ago )

Did their lack of guns change their intention or render their intention irrelevant?

Quote
Guns are the easiest and most effective method to cause a lot of harm to a lot of people in a short amount of time unless you know how to make a bomb which most people don't.

There will always be an easier method of causing harm, no matter how many methods you remove.

Quote
You can't change peoples intentions but you can take away their means of carrying it out.

On the contrary, if someone wants to kill another person, they can do so with or without guns.
« Last Edit: March 27, 2012, 10:37:45 PM by Omen »
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +105/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: Trayvon Martin
« Reply #57 on: March 27, 2012, 10:37:20 PM »
and I don't think someone is going to murder in my bed.

I have no fear that someone is going to murder me in my bed, you can stop constructing grossly exaggerated rationale.

Quote
What if they brought in a law that said you couldn't have a gun anymore. Would you support that?

I would not.
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me