Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
Our laws should not encourage non-violence. Got it.
Laws are not recommendations or encouraging snippets, they are requirements. I get it you don't like the law.
I still, honestly, don't understand why you support it. Do you have an opinion on what public good is served by not requiring citizens to refrain from using lethal force whenever reasonably possible?
I really don't see many artists doing this just because it really narrows their market to where they can play here in the states. Like someone said Stevie doesn't really need to tour and doesn't play that many shows as is, so this doesn't really affect him in the wallet unless he owes uncle same some back taxes or something of that sort.
This is not some insignificant caveat. But I think most of the discussion here has been about the reasonableness of the law in general, not the specifics of the case.
Yes, but the general consensus is that stand your ground was tried in court and got Zimmerman off. In reality, all they claimed was self defense, and with little evidence to show why Martin fought Zimmerman, either gun first or not, there was a reasonable doubt.
Really it seems most people are upset at the reasonable doubt part, which has always been a part of trials in this country.
My opinion on the case is that the second he got out of his car with a gun in pursuit of someone he had no valid reason to believe posed an immediate threat to his or anyone's safety (let alone property), he acted recklessly and the fact that that recklessness resulted in death met the legal definition of manslaughter. I don't think there was any reasonable doubt about the facts I just stated.
I really don't see many artists doing this just because it really narrows their market to where they can play here in the states. Like someone said Stevie doesn't really need to tour and doesn't play that many shows as is, so this doesn't really affect him in the wallet unless he owes uncle same some back taxes or something of that sort.
I think an artist could still make a pretty healthy living playing only the NE, West Coast and Colorado, but I agree this is unlikely to catch on.
Dave what's unclear here is the degree to which Stand Your Ground is Stand Your Ground. Some states it only applies in your home, where other states are much broader.
I was assuming from the graphic which mentions how the laws in question are those that extend outside of the home that all these states had laws that were similar enough to fall under the blanket of what Stevie is talking about.
What would be interesting is to see a Fox News or similar outlet's graphic using the same legend and see if it matched the HuffPo one. Bet they wouldn't.
Edit: pardon my ignorance, I'm assuming this has something to do with that security guard killing a guy thing. My bad, I don't really follow American news.
Nah, it's partly my fault. I mistakenly assumed the original post made a mention of the trial but it doesn't. I figured that all the discussion that included Zimmerman would have tipped you off but sometimes I forget there are non-American's on here.
But Canadians are Americans!
Sorry - couldn't resist. It's a joke I always forget about when I'm in Central or South America. "Where are you from?" "America." "Wow, so are we!" "Alright then, pinhead, the United States."
I haven't read the entire thread so this may have been mentioned already but look at mexico. It is illegal to possess a firearm in mexico. now look at the death toll in the recent war on the cartels. strict firearms laws do not result in a reduction of violent gun crimes. it results in criminals being the only ones with guns.
This is a specious argument. Strict firearm laws would result in the reduction of manufacture of firearms. But because the US manufactures guns and does not have strict gun laws, and because we love all the illegal sh*t that comes over the border, it makes for a wonderful system of guns for drugs. The iron river is a study in commerce not in the effect of gun laws.
This isn't even what is being discussed in the context of the Stevie Wonder announcement anyway.
[ Yes, but the general consensus is that stand your ground was tried in court
General consensus of the nation, or Florida, or inforoo or what? I don't know a single person with whom I've discussed this who thinks stand your ground was tried in court, so legit curious.
[ Yes, but the general consensus is that stand your ground was tried in court
General consensus of the nation, or Florida, or inforoo or what? I don't know a single person with whom I've discussed this who thinks stand your ground was tried in court, so legit curious.
Nation, its apparent Mr wonder believes it, and the news around here hasn't exactly been helpful with blatantly wrong statements about stand your ground being used in the court case.
Every protestors I've seen is protesting stand yiur ground
Yes, but the general consensus is that stand your ground was tried in court and got Zimmerman off. In reality, all they claimed was self defense, and with little evidence to show why Martin fought Zimmerman, either gun first or not, there was a reasonable doubt.
Really it seems most people are upset at the reasonable doubt part, which has always been a part of trials in this country.
My opinion on the case is that the second he got out of his car with a gun in pursuit of someone he had no valid reason to believe posed an immediate threat to his or anyone's safety (let alone property), he acted recklessly and the fact that that recklessness resulted in death met the legal definition of manslaughter. I don't think there was an y reasonable doubt about the facts I just stated.
I agree, but that's negligent homicide, which is civil. Not murder or manslaughter.
General consensus of the nation, or Florida, or inforoo or what? I don't know a single person with whom I've discussed this who thinks stand your ground was tried in court, so legit curious.
Nation, its apparent Mr wonder believes it, and the news around here hasn't exactly been helpful with blatantly wrong statements about stand your ground being used in the court case.
Every protestors I've seen is protesting stand yiur ground
Again, you said yourself stand your ground affected the police investigation. It's clearly a relevant discussion. And just because it wasn't raised at trial doesn't mean it didn't have a significant effect on either sides strategy in the courtroom.
Nation, its apparent Mr wonder believes it, and the news around here hasn't exactly been helpful with blatantly wrong statements about stand your ground being used in the court case.
Every protestors I've seen is protesting stand yiur ground
Again, you said yourself stand your ground affected the police investigation. It's clearly a relevant discussion. And just because it wasn't raised at trial doesn't mean it didn't have a significant effect on either sides strategy in the courtroom.
Yeah - I think there are two things here: 1/knowing whether or not stand your ground was the defense tactic used in court and 2/whether or not stand your ground relates to this case in some way and brings to bear new energy to the discourse on certain legislation.
Nation, its apparent Mr wonder believes it, and the news around here hasn't exactly been helpful with blatantly wrong statements about stand your ground being used in the court case.
Every protestors I've seen is protesting stand yiur ground
Again, you said yourself stand your ground affected the police investigation. It's clearly a relevant discussion. And just because it wasn't raised at trial doesn't mean it didn't have a significant effect on either sides strategy in the courtroom.
Stand your ground is relevant to the case, not the trial. And that's where the confusion comes in. I don't really think they would have found more or less evidence immediately.
But here is the kicker, states like Tennessee don't have that part of the law that let's police make an initial determination. Florida does. So again we are back to an uninformed protest.
Martin deserves justice, unfortunately since he fought Zimmerman, that will likely only be financial
Again, you said yourself stand your ground affected the police investigation. It's clearly a relevant discussion. And just because it wasn't raised at trial doesn't mean it didn't have a significant effect on either sides strategy in the courtroom.
Stand your ground is relevant to the case, not the trial. And that's where the confusion comes in. I don't really think they would have found more or less evidence immediately.
But here is the kicker, states like Tennessee don't have that part of the law that let's police make an initial determination. Florida does. So again we are back to an uninformed protest.
Martin deserves justice, unfortunately since he fought Zimmerman, that will likely only be financial
I'm sorry, but what is uninformed? People have said multiple times no one is pissed because "Zimmerman got off because of Stand Your Ground." Yet you keep using the fact people are "uninformed about Stand Your Ground" as your stance in this discussion. Take a seat Muhammad Ali, that straw man has taken enough of a beating already.
if someone was trying to severely injure or kill me and I had the ability to injure or kill them rather than being the victim I'd be the aggressor every single time
I think if somebody is trying to severely injure or kill you, you are the victim and not the aggressor simply by definition.
Stand your ground is relevant to the case, not the trial. And that's where the confusion comes in. I don't really think they would have found more or less evidence immediately.
But here is the kicker, states like Tennessee don't have that part of the law that let's police make an initial determination. Florida does. So again we are back to an uninformed protest.
Martin deserves justice, unfortunately since he fought Zimmerman, that will likely only be financial
I'm sorry, but what is uninformed? People have said multiple times no one is pissed because "Zimmerman got off because of Stand Your Ground." Yet you keep using the fact people are "uninformed about Stand Your Ground" as your stance in this discussion. Take a seat Muhammad Ali, that straw man has taken enough of a beating already.
Some people are informed, most aren't.
Watch the local news, or read a internet forum, all that is being discussed by most is stand your ground, like this thread.
Mr. Stevie wonder said he wouldn't play in any state with stand your ground when in reality it had little to do with Zimmerman's aquittal
I was assuming from the graphic which mentions how the laws in question are those that extend outside of the home that all these states had laws that were similar enough to fall under the blanket of what Stevie is talking about.
What would be interesting is to see a Fox News or similar outlet's graphic using the same legend and see if it matched the HuffPo one. Bet they wouldn't.
The map itself may actually be the same. The text accompanying it would almost certainly be different as I would venture that conservatives have a higher approval rating for Stand Your Ground-esque laws.
I'm sorry, but what is uninformed? People have said multiple times no one is pissed because "Zimmerman got off because of Stand Your Ground." Yet you keep using the fact people are "uninformed about Stand Your Ground" as your stance in this discussion. Take a seat Muhammad Ali, that straw man has taken enough of a beating already.
Some people are informed, most aren't.
Watch the local news, or read a internet forum, all that is being discussed by most is stand your ground, like this thread.
Mr. Stevie wonder said he wouldn't play in any state with stand your ground when in reality it had little to do with Zimmerman's aquittal
My main question, I guess, is why you're projecting what those people say on the internet or your local news (seriously?) onto this thread, which hasn't been discussing things in that same light?
Stevie Wonder likely made his comments because he believes that the by the law existing, it lead to the events unfolding the way they did. There are those that believe the law played a role in the actions of Zimmerman, because without that backing it is unlikely he pursues a person he perceives to be a threat without any verification whatsoever. It empowered him as a vigilante, or so the thinking goes.
Your acting like it has no business being discussed is just as bad as people acting like it's what got Zimmerman off.
Watch the local news, or read a internet forum, all that is being discussed by most is stand your ground, like this thread.
Mr. Stevie wonder said he wouldn't play in any state with stand your ground when in reality it had little to do with Zimmerman's aquittal
My main question, I guess, is why you're projecting what those people on the internet or your local news (seriously?) onto this thread, which hasn't been discussing things in that same light?
Stevie Wonder likely made his comments because he believes that the by the law existing, it lead to the events unfolding the way they did. There are those that believe the law played a role in the actions of Zimmerman, because without that backing it is unlikely he pursues a person he perceives to be a threat without any verification whatsoever. It empowered him as a vigilante, or so the thinking goes.
Your acting like it has no business being discussed is just as bad as people acting like it's what got Zimmerman off.
Because this is the internet, and about Stevie wonder nd stand your ground?
My main question, I guess, is why you're projecting what those people on the internet or your local news (seriously?) onto this thread, which hasn't been discussing things in that same light?
Stevie Wonder likely made his comments because he believes that the by the law existing, it lead to the events unfolding the way they did. There are those that believe the law played a role in the actions of Zimmerman, because without that backing it is unlikely he pursues a person he perceives to be a threat without any verification whatsoever. It empowered him as a vigilante, or so the thinking goes.
Your acting like it has no business being discussed is just as bad as people acting like it's what got Zimmerman off.
Because this is the internet, and about Stevie wonder nd stand your ground?
Wow.
Thank you for that lesson, but my question is still unanswered. Why are you holding the opinion of random people who are not present for this discussion against the people who are in this discussion? None of us are saying the things you're arguing against, and the reasoning behind Wonder's comments are pretty easily explained as "Stevie believes that Stand Your Ground contributed to the unnecessary loss of life."
It's certainly a bold move. I respect what he's trying to do, just don't know how effective it will be. If others follow his lead? Who knows.
If I remember my history correctly, Little Steven did end Apartheid.
Probably not. But he did what he could to show South Africa that, as long as apartheid was the law of the land, their country would be isolated. I think that artist boycotts and athletic boycotts collectively may have helped the white South Africans realize how out of step they were with what the rest of the world deemed moral behavior.
My opinion on the case is that the second he got out of his car with a gun in pursuit of someone he had no valid reason to believe posed an immediate threat to his or anyone's safety (let alone property), he acted recklessly and the fact that that recklessness resulted in death met the legal definition of manslaughter. I don't think there was an y reasonable doubt about the facts I just stated.
I agree, but that's negligent homicide, which is civil. Not murder or manslaughter.
The parents should file a wrongful death suit
This isn't accurate. And in Florida, Stand Your Ground laws are a defense against civil actions anyway.
I agree, but that's negligent homicide, which is civil. Not murder or manslaughter.
The parents should file a wrongful death suit
This isn't accurate. And in Florida, Stand Your Ground laws are a defense against civil actions anyway.
It's actually brilliant strategy by the defense team - they knew they could forgo using stand your ground as a defense and still have the instructions go to the jury like this (bolding is mine):
In deciding whether George Zimmerman was justified in the use of deadly force, you must judge him by the circumstances by which he was surrounded at the time the force was used. The danger facing George Zimmerman need not have been actual; however, to justify the use of deadly force, the appearance of danger must have been so real that a reasonably cautious and prudent person under the same circumstances would have believed that the danger could be avoided only through the use of that force. Based upon appearances, George Zimmerman must have actually believed that the danger was real.
If George Zimmerman was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in anyplace where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
Now, they can use his acquittal and fully engage in the stand your ground defense and he'll probably never have to pay a dime. Other than legal fees - covered largely by the hotshot defense attorney who wants the spotlight. This on top of Fox News celebrating Lupe Fiasco as the only "celebrity with reason" in this matter. Oy.
I'm sorry, but what is uninformed? People have said multiple times no one is pissed because "Zimmerman got off because of Stand Your Ground." Yet you keep using the fact people are "uninformed about Stand Your Ground" as your stance in this discussion. Take a seat Muhammad Ali, that straw man has taken enough of a beating already.
Some people are informed, most aren't.
Watch the local news, or read a internet forum, all that is being discussed by most is stand your ground, like this thread.
Mr. Stevie wonder said he wouldn't play in any state with stand your ground when in reality it had little to do with Zimmerman's aquittal
Come on dude, quit making ad homonym attacks against straw men. If you support Stand Your Ground laws I'd love to hear why. But if you want you spout some bullsh*t about how "some people" are "wrong" about facts about a case that is only one small part of the issue we're discussing, you're dodging the issue.
Do you think people should be allowed to use deadly force against an agressor when there are reasonable non-lethal means available for personal protection?
All this stuff you brought up about whether or not Zimmerman brought up stand your ground in trial or whether stand your ground affects police work in Tennessee is completely beside the point in my mind. Hell, I'd much rather have a discussion about the broad point, which is this: Should we as a society find it legally and morally acceptable for citizens to act as vigilante police when there is no immediate threat to anyone's person or property? What's your opinion? I say absolutely not.
When you are born in America, or in any society, you give up certain rights for the public good. In America, you give up those freedoms but are allowed a say in your welfare by having the right to vote in legislation, for your local police force, for your DA, judges, etc.* I'm happy to give up some of those rights in exchange for my democratic input. But I want my laws to be decided by legislature, and I want my guilt or innocence regarding those laws and the corresponding punishment to be decided by a jury of my peers. That's my Constitutional right. I find it completely unacceptable that many states in this country give armed citizens the ability to serve as judge jury and executioner, not based on whether such lethal force is reasonably necessary to protect oneself, but whether or not they meet certain criteria divorced of the situation they were in.
Please, tell me what you think about any of the things I just said, but spare me the bullsh*t about "the local news" or what your opinion about the Zimmerman trial is.
*Leaving aside the fact that there are still organized efforts to disenfranchise people in this country based on their skin tone or political affiliation.
