George Zimmerman--the ultimate victim?

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#186 Jan 2, 2013
Oliver Twist wrote:
<quoted text>
You are the one who has voluntarily left your comfortable upper middle class upbringing to live in ghetto conditions. Sort of like the Duchess of Nottingham going to live amongst the African aborigines. Can we say self-hatred of the highest order? Can we say White Guilt to an extreme?
You are the sick one.
You are the one who hates our founding fathers, traditions and values.
As to where I live and what it indicates, well that kinda depends on what your value, doesn't it? If you value things like sameness and keeping up with the Joneses, then choosing my life would be pretty much an indicator of self-hatred.

If, on the other hand, one values authenticity, human differences, solid wood doors in brick edifices, then a move to a split level on a cul-de-sac would be an indication of self-loathing.

But, perhaps you would be so kind as to explain what specific values, traditions and founding fathers you believe that I hate. And then explain what I have ever actually said (you can leave out all the presumed "all you liberals ..." rhetoric, just the facts, please) that lead you to that conclusion.

Because I hold that your conclusion in wrong.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#187 Jan 2, 2013
Oliver Twist wrote:
<quoted text>
You are the one who has voluntarily left your comfortable upper middle class upbringing to live in ghetto conditions. Sort of like the Duchess of Nottingham going to live amongst the African aborigines. Can we say self-hatred of the highest order? Can we say White Guilt to an extreme?
You are the sick one.
You are the one who hates our founding fathers, traditions and values.
By the way, being middle class has nothing to do with where one lives.
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

#188 Jan 2, 2013
Sgt Frank wrote:
<quoted text>
Because you are like many americans, with your classic appeal to authority illogic, it would be a good idea to implement a new constitutional amendment that places limits on your foolishness.
I suggest that a new constitutional amendment be drafted that bars all professional lawyers from public office. Since lawyers make a living litigating law, and are highly incentivized to create more BS laws to stimulate litigation thus feathering their own nest, it is an inherent conflict of interest for a lawyer to be trusted in any position to make public law.
The new amendment would bar professional lawyers from being legislators or judges. It would reduce the foolishness that occurs now, which is the status quo you relish.
After you get that accomplished you can move on to criminalizing doctors who practice medicine, architects who design buildings, and mechanics who repair motor vehicles.

You're a nut!

woof
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

#189 Jan 2, 2013
TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you have a link to a ruling that says that? I believe that if they meant "local governments" they would have said "local governments" in the tenth amendment.
He doesn't need jurisprudence to interpret the Constitution.

He just makes it up as he reads it.

woof
Enzyte Bob

Columbus, OH

#190 Jan 2, 2013
FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
By the way, being middle class has nothing to do with where one lives.
Okay, then.

Being middle class and sane.
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

#191 Jan 2, 2013
FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
The method and the outcome at Waco were both tragic and I have no intention of defending them.
However a warrant was lawfully obtained and I believe that the grounds included the substantiated belief that women and children were being held against their will and that children were being physically and sexually abused. Various agencies were mandated to respond to this information, but were denied entry.
In fact, prior to having this information, the local authorities were concerned, both about the children and the level of armaments, but did not intervene, as they had no legal grounds to do so.
Face it, in a free society, secessionists who arm themselves heavily and hole up as the group did in Waco, are demonstrating on their face traits of paranoia and other mental illnesses that should be treated with caution. The fact that some rabid gun lovers miss this point draws their own reasoning faculties into question.
You're absolutely correct with this one exception: Social workers did get access. And what they saw caused them more concern for the safety of the kids than they had initially.

I agree, the ATF was heavy handed, and the investigation and raid were initiated primarily for political reasons.

But the fact of the matter is that the warrant was valid on the day it was served, and had Vernon Howell simply permitted the search and fought the legality of the warrant in court at a later date, 82 people would not have died a month and a half later.

People who think otherwise should consider this: If you're driving down a highway and the red and blue lights come on in the rear view, that doesn't men you have a right to drive faster and pull out your firearms because the stop clearly violates the 4th Amendment. That's an issue for the courts to determine, with evidence placed before it.

I remember watching that unfold and thinking the authorities should have simply left the scene, and sent in negotiators a couple of weeks later. The situation was volatile, but it onluybecame so after those in the compound started firing at law enforcement serving a valid warrant.

Here's some interesting reading:

http://www.jaedworks.com/shoebox/waco.html

http://www.davekopel.com/waco/LawRev/warrant....

woof
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

#192 Jan 2, 2013
Oliver Twist wrote:
<quoted text>
You are the one who has voluntarily left your comfortable upper middle class upbringing to live in ghetto conditions. Sort of like the Duchess of Nottingham going to live amongst the African aborigines. Can we say self-hatred of the highest order? Can we say White Guilt to an extreme?
You are the sick one.
You are the one who hates our founding fathers, traditions and values.
You might wanna look a little deeper into the backgrounds of some of those folks.

Start with Alexander Hamilton.

woof

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#193 Jan 2, 2013
Duke for Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>

People who think otherwise should consider this: If you're driving down a highway and the red and blue lights come on in the rear view, that doesn't men you have a right to drive faster and pull out your firearms because the stop clearly violates the 4th Amendment. That's an issue for the courts to determine, with evidence placed before it.
I suspect that Sgt Frank is one of those "natural law" nuts who would in fact open fire upon the police if stopped for a traffic violation.

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#194 Jan 2, 2013
Duke for Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>
You're absolutely correct with this one exception: Social workers did get access. And what they saw caused them more concern for the safety of the kids than they had initially.
I stand corrected. I thought the story was that there were some kids who escaped--perhaps with their mother, who had told their story to social workers.

With the kids still in there, everything became a tough call.

It seems that some of the more provocative actions on the outside were initiated with an eye to speeding things along--somewhat justified if you consider the presence of and potential danger to the children.

It's pretty hard to tell how long they could have remained holed up while waiting for a surrender.

End of the day, wasn't it determined that the fire was set from inside the compound--perhaps after tear gas was released?
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

#195 Jan 2, 2013
FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
I suspect that Sgt Frank is one of those "natural law" nuts who would in fact open fire upon the police if stopped for a traffic violation.
I suspect he is a natural law nut who cries like a baby when the cablevision goes out during Hannity.

woof
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

#196 Jan 2, 2013
FKA Reader wrote:
<quoted text>
End of the day, wasn't it determined that the fire was set from inside the compound--perhaps after tear gas was released?
That was the conclusion of the Danforth Report, and the various trials, yes.

A lot of people don't believe it though.

Regardless, if he just would have let em in, and lawyered up, nobody would have died.

woof

Hugh Victor Thompson III

“Larchmont's Leading Citizen”

Since: Dec 12

Hilliard, OH

#197 Jan 2, 2013
Duke for Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>
Here you go George, since you're playing the role of simpleton again:
1) The column is not about abortion, its about gun violence.
2) Even if it were about abortion, you argument is bullsh!t, given the long documented history of fatal violence perpetrated by anti-abortion advocates, and the utter absence of any similar history of such acts perpetrated by those in favor of gun restrictions.
3) You are smart enough to be able to discern the writer's true intent,(I thought), and that intent is not what you facetiously imply that it is.
4) You constantly engage in these tactics.
5) You are the Queen of the Topix hypocrites.
woof
Looks like Victor Davis Hanson disagrees with you, Dukie:

A journalist, Donald Kaul, in the Des Moines Register offers us a three-step, presto! plan to stop school shootings:

Repeal the Second Amendment, the part about guns anyway. It’s badly written, confusing and more trouble than it’s worth.… Declare the NRA a terrorist organization and make membership illegal. Hey! We did it to the Communist Party, and the NRA has led to the deaths of more of us than American Commies ever did.…Then I would tie Mitch McConnell and John Boehner, our esteemed Republican leaders, to the back of a Chevy pickup truck and drag them around a parking lot until they saw the light on gun control.

Note the new ease with which the liberal mind calls for trashing the Constitution, outlawing those whom they don’t like (reminiscent of “punish our enemies”?), and killing those politicians with whom they don’t agree (we are back to Bush Derangement Syndrome, when novels, movies, and op-eds dreamed of the president’s assassination.)

What would be the Register’s reaction should a conservative opponent of abortion dare write,“Repeal the First Amendment; ban Planned Parenthood as a terrorist organization; and drag Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi from a truck”? If an idiot were to write that trash, I doubt the Washington Times or Wall Street Journal would print such sick calls for overturning the Constitution and committing violence against public officials.
http://pjmedia.com/victordavishanson/very-sca...
Female

Chillicothe, OH

#198 Jan 2, 2013
Karl Monday wrote:
<quoted text>
The people who built the country.
Are black Karl? Our country was built on the backs of black men. Free labor. What do you think the reason for slavery was? Answer that!!

“Don't trust the internet!”

Since: Jan 12

Location hidden

#199 Jan 2, 2013
Interesting bit about the impact of Stand Your Ground laws:

While the overall homicide rates in those states stayed relatively flat, the average number of justifiable cases per year increased by more than 50% in the decade’s latter half.

In a new study, an economics professor and a PhD student at Texas A&M University take a broader look at the laws’ effect. The authors, Professor Mark Hoekstra and Cheng Cheng, use state-level crime data from 2000 to 2009 to determine whether the laws deter crime.

The answer, they conclude, is no. In fact, the evidence suggests the laws have led to an increase in homicides.

From the study:

Results indicate that the prospect of facing additional self-defense does not deter crime. Specifically, we find no evidence of deterrence effects on burglary, robbery, or aggravated assault. Moreover, our estimates are sufficiently precise as to rule out meaningful deterrence effects.

In contrast, we find significant evidence that the laws increase homicides. Suggestive but inconclusive evidence indicates that castle doctrine laws increase the narrowly defined category of justifiable homicides by private citizens by 17 to 50 percent, which translates into as many as 50 additional justifiable homicides per year nationally due to castle doctrine. More significantly, we find the laws increase murder and manslaughter by a statistically significant 7 to 9 percent, which translates into an additional 500 to 700 homicides per year nationally across the states that adopted castle doctrine.

Thus, by lowering the expected costs associated with using lethal force, castle doctrine laws induce more of it. This increase in homicides could be due either to the increased use of lethal force in self-defense situations, or to the escalation of violence in otherwise non-lethal conflicts. We suspect that self-defense situations are unlikely to explain all of the increase, as we also find that murder alone is increased by a statistically significant 6 to 11 percent.

As the authors note, the increase in homicides may not be viewed by everyone as “unambiguously bad.” It could be driven by individuals protecting themselves from imminent harm by using lethal force. But it could also be driven by an escalation in violence that, absent the “castle doctrine,” wouldn’t have ended in serious injury for either party, they say.

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/06/11/study-say...

Hugh Victor Thompson III

“Larchmont's Leading Citizen”

Since: Dec 12

Hilliard, OH

#200 Jan 2, 2013
Female wrote:
<quoted text> Are black Karl? Our country was built on the backs of black men. Free labor. What do you think the reason for slavery was? Answer that!!
Primarily agriculture, in eleven non-industrial states. They "built" parts of family fortunes for an insignificant number of Southern aristocrats. The infrastructure of this nation did not rely on slavery at any point in antebellum history.
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

#201 Jan 2, 2013
Hugh Victor Thompson III wrote:
<quoted text>Looks like Victor Davis Hanson disagrees with you, Dukie:
A journalist, Donald Kaul, in the Des Moines Register offers us a three-step, presto! plan to stop school shootings:
Repeal the Second Amendment, the part about guns anyway. It’s badly written, confusing and more trouble than it’s worth.… Declare the NRA a terrorist organization and make membership illegal. Hey! We did it to the Communist Party, and the NRA has led to the deaths of more of us than American Commies ever did.…Then I would tie Mitch McConnell and John Boehner, our esteemed Republican leaders, to the back of a Chevy pickup truck and drag them around a parking lot until they saw the light on gun control.
Note the new ease with which the liberal mind calls for trashing the Constitution, outlawing those whom they don’t like (reminiscent of “punish our enemies”?), and killing those politicians with whom they don’t agree (we are back to Bush Derangement Syndrome, when novels, movies, and op-eds dreamed of the president’s assassination.)
What would be the Register’s reaction should a conservative opponent of abortion dare write,“Repeal the First Amendment; ban Planned Parenthood as a terrorist organization; and drag Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi from a truck”? If an idiot were to write that trash, I doubt the Washington Times or Wall Street Journal would print such sick calls for overturning the Constitution and committing violence against public officials.
http://pjmedia.com/victordavishanson/very-sca...
Do you think I'm surprised that you can easily find people who are just as ignorant as you? I'm not.

You spend much of your day searching, cutting and pasting from blogs whose authors share your sentiments, George. I already know that.

woof
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

#202 Jan 2, 2013
By the way George.

Have you researched who the Des Moines Register's Editorial Board endorsed for President in November?

woof

Hugh Victor Thompson III

“Larchmont's Leading Citizen”

Since: Dec 12

Hilliard, OH

#203 Jan 2, 2013
Duke for Mayor wrote:
By the way George.
Have you researched who the Des Moines Register's Editorial Board endorsed for President in November?
woof
So what? The Dispatch endorsed Romney but consistently editorializes against concealed carry while shilling for the gay "community" like a rube's version of The Village Voice.
Enzyte Bob

Columbus, OH

#204 Jan 2, 2013
Duke for Mayor wrote:
By the way George.
Have you researched who the Des Moines Register's Editorial Board endorsed for President in November?
woof
First time in how many years?

Hugh Victor Thompson III

“Larchmont's Leading Citizen”

Since: Dec 12

Hilliard, OH

#205 Jan 2, 2013
Duke for Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you think I'm surprised that you can easily find people who are just as ignorant as you? I'm not.
You spend much of your day searching, cutting and pasting from blogs whose authors share your sentiments, George. I already know that.
woof
When you are awarded a National Humanities Medal, get back to us.
There's no need for me to "search," Dukie. I know where to look at any given time. Just as I imagine you do when you pull legal decisions. But I'll be sure to ridicule your cut and paste the next time I see it.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Columbus Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Ray Lewis gets shut down 22 min d pants 3
Trump's Erraticism < loss of Eroticism 4 hr Bella 10
News Columbus meteorologist Jym Ganahl returns to th... 7 hr They cannot kill ... 4
300 dead in Somalia blast 8 hr Pope Che Reagan C... 2
News Some residents don't like them, but Columbus sa... 8 hr They cannot kill ... 1
News Ohio ethane cracker main topic for Wheeling, WV... 8 hr They cannot kill ... 1
Trump Supporters love Russia more than The USA 9 hr They cannot kill ... 3

Columbus Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Columbus Mortgages