Karma reasons for concrete message

Message

jaimehlers



    Posts: 4831
  • Darwins +557/-17

You apparently didnt read the law on self defense, in an attempt to remain willfully ignorant. But I will pull it for you again since you appear incapable of doing anything independently.
Of course I read it, your attempts to pretend that I'm willfully ignorant notwithstanding.  I am no longer willing to tolerate your continued snubs and pretentious attitude merely so you can maintain this...pretense that anyone who does not agree with you is trying to justify murder.  You are only interested in validating your own belief with regards to the events that happened that night, and anyone or anything - including the facts - that get in the way are on the "side of murder" as far as you're concerned.

Quote from: The Gawd
As I stated before, Martin was well within his right to use self defense, your blood thirst for young kids not-withstanding. There you have the law, will you stop your pattern of ignorance and dishonesty and recognize the kid's right to defend himself. I will not go further with your ignorance until you acknowledge that.
I am neither ignorant nor deceptive, and you are lying here.  I quoted several times from that very article you linked, yet you are claiming I never even read it.  Well, I did, and even quoted from it.

Let me reiterate the critical part of that law that you are blatantly ignoring:  "imminent use of unlawful force".

Imminent use of unlawful force.

Imminent use of unlawful force.

Imminent use of unlawful force.

That means that you have to believe that you are about to be attacked before you can justifiably attack another in self-defense.

I don't expect an answer, unfortunately, because you pulled the "I'm going to ignore you until you admit I'm right" trick that theists are fond of, but let me ask you straight up:  Where was the "imminent use of unlawful force" regarding Zimmerman following Martin?  And before you try it, the claim that Zimmerman shooting him represented an "imminent use of unlawful force" is circular reasoning.  It's basically saying that merely carrying a gun represents an "imminent use of unlawful force", which is simply wrong.
Changed Change Reason Date
Azdgari Your patience has been admirable in this thread. July 27, 2013, 01:15:40 PM