How Trayvon Martin shooting is relevant to AS rights

Page 3 of 5 [ 78 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

05 Apr 2012, 1:33 am

Tadzio wrote:

Under the law before the new 2005 "Stand Your Ground" Law, any "person who tries to avoid the fight at all costs" would have already been protected from facing punishment. The 2005 "Stand Your Ground Law" removed ANY AND ALL duty to "try to avoid the fight". For instance, in the 2011 SAAVEDRA case, the judge noted (page 8 ): "Under current Florida law, the Defendant had no duty to retreat, but, even so, the evidence clearly shows that the Defendant did, in fact, retreat in several ways and was legally entitled to meet force with force, even deadly force."
http://media.naplesnews.com/media/stati ... 150108.pdf

Individuals with autism are 50 times more likely to be shot by a private citizen than shot by a police officer.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/deaths ... elease.pdf
http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/offens ... le_15.html
Calling such homicides by private citizens as "Stand Your Ground" Self-Defense shootings with complete Immunity is outrageous.

When a "legal gun carrier" uses the gun in the commission of a crime, the "gun carrier" has just lost the rubric of "legal gun carrier", so a deceptive polemic is stating that no "legal gun carrier" has committed any criminal gun act.

Some "pseudo" would-be SYG'ers go as far as to make claims like:

"I can change reality with my words; it's called persuasion, lobbying and activism",

as during when they try every tool of verbal prevarication they think will might work in twisting the truth to fit to their point of view. When I noted in one response that the manipulation of words had tended to result in incorrect facts, to absurdities, I received the response:

"As a rule I don't like to club baby seals, it's unseemly and tiring on the wrists, but if you insist on nipping at my heels all the time I might just indulge you,"
Mod. edit to correct misquote and restore omitted text: "In plain English: Keep insulting me personally and I will return the favor."

and, a majority of people at a local university I asked about the intensity of the remark, took it as a threat of deadly violence.

No SYG from wrists concerns then, but any SYG with free speech & right to political opinions, etc., leads to third-party involvement desired suddenly by the bully with the tendency to indulge in clubbing baby seals.

Tadzio




The solution: For individuals with high functioning autism & aspergers to arm themselves with handguns for self-defense against armed private citizens.



Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

05 Apr 2012, 2:02 am

Here you go Tadzio, since your selective understanding of idioms seems to still be troubling you so much, go ahead and fill this out and submit it:

[img][800:1129]http://htmlimg4.scribdassets.com/9dcm5xqreo5xnf4/images/1-01ece685d9.jpg[/img]

I'm sure people will take your claims far more seriously if put into this form.


_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez


Tadzio
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Sep 2009
Age: 74
Gender: Male
Posts: 877

05 Apr 2012, 2:14 am

AspieRogue wrote:
The solution: For individuals with high functioning autism & aspergers to arm themselves with handguns for self-defense against armed private citizens.


Many individuals with autism and/or aspergers (esp. any with any record of "meltdowns" or "fits" or "social withdrawals") are barred from possession of firearms. "Private" publications advise government law enforcement and social workers/health-care how to deprive 5150's and many others of gun possession rights in California over even minor DSM-IV labels (and elsewhere, with CA as a model).

Google "autism disqualifies gun possession?" for widely ranging viewpoints. For instance:

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/politics ... ted-mental

versus

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/show ... p?t=365030

Tadzio



Tadzio
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Sep 2009
Age: 74
Gender: Male
Posts: 877

05 Apr 2012, 2:17 am

Dox47 wrote:
Here you go Tadzio, since your selective understanding of idioms seems to still be troubling you so much, go ahead and fill this out and submit it:

[img][800:1129]http://htmlimg4.scribdassets.com/9dcm5xqreo5xnf4/images/1-01ece685d9.jpg[/img]

I'm sure people will take your claims far more seriously if put into this form.


references



Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

05 Apr 2012, 2:22 am

marshall wrote:
I think people outside the US have a somewhat insulting stereotypical view. The US is a big place and the culture varies greatly. The vast majority of people do not carry a gun everywhere they go. Most own a gun purely for hunting or recreational purposes. I also think the level of overt racism is not as high in the US as it is in some areas of Europe. Most of the racism we do have comes down to political BS, not normal everyday interactions.


I agree completely, especially having personally upbraided CCL in another thread over essentially the same thing; stereotyped and inaccurate views of US culture and norms. I would add that even within gun culture there are widespread differences, with rural gun owners trending more towards hunting and incidental defense, and urban ones more towards competition and specific defense. Sometimes this divide is referred to as gun cultures 1.0 and 2.0, though there is plenty of mixing as well. I'm a 2.0 guy myself, being primarily interested in handguns and self defense specific guns, but I also really like certain historical guns like old buffalo rifles and flintlock blunderbusses.


_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez


05 Apr 2012, 2:31 am

Tadzio wrote:
AspieRogue wrote:
The solution: For individuals with high functioning autism & aspergers to arm themselves with handguns for self-defense against armed private citizens.


Many individuals with autism and/or aspergers (esp. any with any record of "meltdowns" or "fits" or "social withdrawals") are barred from possession of firearms. "Private" publications advise government law enforcement and social workers/health-care how to deprive 5150's and many others of gun possession rights in California over even minor DSM-IV labels (and elsewhere, with CA as a model).

Google "autism disqualifies gun possession?" for widely ranging viewpoints. For instance:

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/politics ... ted-mental

versus

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/show ... p?t=365030

Tadzio




California has some pretty strict gun laws.....Or so I've heard. However, Asperger Syndrome is classified as a neurological disorder and is not a mental illness. I checked the RCW in my state of WA and there is nothing barring an aspie here from legally purchasing and possessing a firearm. The only thing that would disqualify you from the 5150 is if you were involuntarily committed to the loony bin. If that doesn't apply to you than you most certainly CAN own a gun legally.



Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

05 Apr 2012, 2:46 am

AspieRogue wrote:
California has some pretty strict gun laws.....Or so I've heard. However, Asperger Syndrome is classified as a neurological disorder and is not a mental illness. I checked the RCW in my state of WA and there is nothing barring an aspie here from legally purchasing and possessing a firearm. The only thing that would disqualify you from the 5150 is if you were involuntarily committed to the loony bin. If that doesn't apply to you than you most certainly CAN own a gun legally.


Yep, you can also get a CCW as a diagnosed Aspie. I'm pretty sure that involuntary commitment is the standard nationally, if there are any states that have further restrictions on firearms ownership having to do with diagnosed medical conditions then I'm not aware of them. AFIK the disqualifies are felonies, DV convictions, involuntary commitment, dishonorable discharge, and being under a restraining order or indictment. The forms you fill out also make you attest that you're not an illegal drug user or a straw purchaser along with a number of other things, but again nothing about medical conditions.

By the by, you really should read up on us CCW holders before making posts portraying us as menaces to the autistic; we're much, much more law abiding than the general public and less of a danger to anyone on the spectrum than say, the police.


_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez


Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

05 Apr 2012, 2:48 am

Tadzio wrote:
references


Going to try and get me in trouble again? Maybe threaten another lolsuit?

Good luck with that.


_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez


Tadzio
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Sep 2009
Age: 74
Gender: Male
Posts: 877

05 Apr 2012, 3:50 am

AspieRogue wrote:
California has some pretty strict gun laws.....Or so I've heard. However, Asperger Syndrome is classified as a neurological disorder and is not a mental illness. I checked the RCW in my state of WA and there is nothing barring an aspie here from legally purchasing and possessing a firearm. The only thing that would disqualify you from the 5150 is if you were involuntarily committed to the loony bin. If that doesn't apply to you than you most certainly CAN own a gun legally.


Hi AspieRogue,

Here's one book of a few "civil" moves officials often use "Using Civil Remedies for Criminal Behavior: Rationale, Case Studies, and Constitutional Issues" by Peter Finn, Maria O'Brien Hylton, National Institute of Justice, pages 27-30 (MEU technicality on page 28, 1st column):

http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=c ... 0+sworn%22

Tadzio



WilliamWDelaney
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Apr 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,201

05 Apr 2012, 9:52 am

Dox, the world does not revolve around your damn guns. The Democratic agenda is not based on "to take away Dox's guns." It is not a central concern for any reasoning human being to take away your damn guns. The subject of this discussion is the Stand your Ground law, which has no relationship whatsoever with your damn guns. The only reason that the subject of your guns comes into your mind is that you have a paranoid delusion that every discussion remotely related to guns is a discussion about your "right" to own guns. Pull your head out of this fantasy world you seem to live in, and try to focus on the actual subject of this discussion.



CoMF
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 7 Feb 2012
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 328

05 Apr 2012, 12:36 pm

WilliamWDelaney wrote:
The only reason that the subject of your guns comes into your mind is that you have a paranoid delusion that every discussion remotely related to guns is a discussion about your "right" to own guns. Pull your head out of this fantasy world you seem to live in, and try to focus on the actual subject of this discussion.


And yet, somehow, discussions such as these almost inevitably gravitate towards the question of: "Well, what exactly constitutes reasonable firearms ownership anyway?" More often than not, this is due to the fact that certain people cannot emotionally detach themselves enough to focus solely on the root of the problem in cases involving the suspicious use of lethal force, therefore making it a political rather than a legal issue.

With that being said, perhaps there's a bit more to his apprehensions than "paranoid delusions" or armchair psychiatry?



Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,670
Location: Seattle-ish

05 Apr 2012, 2:56 pm

WilliamWDelaney wrote:
Dox, the world does not revolve around your damn guns. The Democratic agenda is not based on "to take away Dox's guns." It is not a central concern for any reasoning human being to take away your damn guns. The subject of this discussion is the Stand your Ground law, which has no relationship whatsoever with your damn guns. The only reason that the subject of your guns comes into your mind is that you have a paranoid delusion that every discussion remotely related to guns is a discussion about your "right" to own guns. Pull your head out of this fantasy world you seem to live in, and try to focus on the actual subject of this discussion.


Did you actually read any of my posts in this thread Delaney? I've posted about why I think the fear of SYG is overblown, and I've responded to other people's posts, and that's about it. If you're going to attack me, at least try and make it have some bearing on what I've actually said.


_________________
Your boos mean nothing, I've seen what makes you cheer.

- Rick Sanchez


WilliamWDelaney
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Apr 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,201

05 Apr 2012, 4:45 pm

CoMF wrote:
armchair psychiatry?
That wasn't armchair psychiatry. When I start practicing armchair psychiatry, you will find your poor, crippled, inferior mind so confused by the influx of "big words" that you will fail to recognize it from the instructions you fail to read on the back of a bottle of over-the-counter medicine, so screw you.



WilliamWDelaney
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Apr 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,201

05 Apr 2012, 5:04 pm

Dox47 wrote:
WilliamWDelaney wrote:
Dox, the world does not revolve around your damn guns. The Democratic agenda is not based on "to take away Dox's guns." It is not a central concern for any reasoning human being to take away your damn guns. The subject of this discussion is the Stand your Ground law, which has no relationship whatsoever with your damn guns. The only reason that the subject of your guns comes into your mind is that you have a paranoid delusion that every discussion remotely related to guns is a discussion about your "right" to own guns. Pull your head out of this fantasy world you seem to live in, and try to focus on the actual subject of this discussion.


Did you actually read any of my posts in this thread Delaney? I've posted about why I think the fear of SYG is overblown, and I've responded to other people's posts, and that's about it. If you're going to attack me, at least try and make it have some bearing on what I've actually said.
I do know that you have strained my patience to the limit with your obsession over your "gun rights," which seems to inhibit your ability to discuss anything else. I am strongly of the opinion that your "they're trying to take away my guns" paranoia has skewed your judgment to the point that I no longer feel that I am required to read anything other than "Dox47" to realize that what is to follow will be either 1) half-hearted Obama-bashing or 2) a manifestation of your demented belief that the entire liberal agenda gravitates around taking away your guns. You have really become that predictable, so it's not my fault if you have a lucid moment at some point and actually make some use of your potential intelligence. Take me on LGBT issues. That's you over your gun bull crap, kay? An absolute abandonment of reason and perspective.

The problem with SYG laws is that they are gaping wide open to abuse, and this has been demonstrated in spades by the Zimmerman/Martin case. The law is flawed. The law needs to be rethought. If you would like to make a statement that Florida's SYG law is flawless as it is presently and not in need of being rethought on any level, go ahead and make that statement. It would save us a lot of time. Instead of pursuing this topic further, I could simply label you a candidate for institutionalization at the nearest mental hospital and call it a day.

Hey, I just suggested you take a moment for abstract thought! Oh, the horror! The horror! How could I subject you to such torture!



WilliamWDelaney
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Apr 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,201

05 Apr 2012, 5:19 pm

http://miami.cbslocal.com/2012/03/20/de ... d-enacted/

article wrote:
According to state crime stats, Florida averaged 12 “justifiable homicide” deaths a year from 2000-2004. After “Stand your Ground” was passed in 2005, the number of “justifiable” deaths has almost tripled to an average of 35 a year, an increase of 283% from 2005-2010.
Hey, look at the statistics that it didn't take a rocket scientist to figure out!! ! In fact, the only way you could possibly have failed to have predicted this outcome is being so wedded to the idea that you have a right to play "cowboys and indians" that it takes away your ability to operate at the most primitive level of human reason!! This is worse than being stupid! A stupid person is too simple-minded to contemplate the level of self-deceit that could cause someone to think that the SYG law in Florida is anything but a legalization and legitimization of the darkest of all possible crimes. The SYG law needs to be reformed if not scrapped altogether.

Hey, you could probably think about this a lot more clearly if you could manage to separate "when liberals mention guns, they are thinking of taking away my guns" from, "we have a law now that says you can kill someone just because you happened to be feeling uncomfortable." There is a really big difference between these subjects.



CoMF
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 7 Feb 2012
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 328

05 Apr 2012, 5:25 pm

WilliamWDelaney wrote:
That wasn't armchair psychiatry. When I start practicing armchair psychiatry, you will find your poor, crippled, inferior mind so confused by the influx of "big words" that you will fail to recognize it from the instructions you fail to read on the back of a bottle of over-the-counter medicine, so screw you.


Yeah, yeah... Sticks and stones, and all that...

Love you too, sweetheart.