Remember me
▼ Content

One reason for social distancing/isolation



Page 8 of 20<<<678910>>>
18-05-2020 00:21
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(7463)
tmiddles wrote:

By the way, I didn't comment on this display of dishonesty.

You didn't juxtapose photos accurately depicting the 6-foot-2-inches athletic adult Treyvon Martin against 5-foot-seven-inches George Zimmerman so that people could render a fair assessment. You juxtaposed only busts of Zimmerman (how tall is he?) and of a childhood photo of Treyvon Martin for distracting and misguided emotional appeal. That is despicable.

It's exactly what Reuters would do.
Attached image:

18-05-2020 00:44
duncan61
★★★☆☆
(571)
Nice work IBDM I fell for that hook line and sinker.How could that nice young boy hurt the big bad white guy.Is this like the tsunami that hit japan and all the photos of the floating dead had the nuclear power station in the background inferring it had something to do with it
18-05-2020 02:26
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3374)
IBdaMann wrote:
You didn't juxtapose photos accurately...
I just grabbed what popped up online. Why don't you do it right IBD.

You keep dodging my question here.

Should everyone, Mr. Martin included, be walking around with a gun.

Then the show down between Martin and Zimmerman would have been fair right? A good old shoot out.

Still not going to answer?
18-05-2020 02:29
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13291)
duncan61 wrote:
Nice work IBDM I fell for that hook line and sinker.How could that nice young boy hurt the big bad white guy.Is this like the tsunami that hit japan and all the photos of the floating dead had the nuclear power station in the background inferring it had something to do with it


Quite right. The nuclear power station suffered catastrophic destruction of several reactors, most notably reactor No. 2. The station itself suffered total power failure. The only casualties were from the tidal wave itself, none were caused by the failure of the reactors.

An no release of nuclear material, other then underwater from reactor No. 2, and that was minimal. The bulk of that fuel is fused into a solid mass entangled among twisted wreckage of the reactor. Only specially built robots can get into there, and carefully, due to the amount of high speed neutrons still emanating from the wreck.

They are slowly cleaning it up.

Meanwhile, Japan has returned to a normal life. They still go to work, fish off the waters of Japan, and everything. They picked up the pieces and rebuilt.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
18-05-2020 02:30
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13291)
tmiddles wrote:...deleted Mantras 26...29...


No argument presented. RQAA.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
18-05-2020 16:48
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(7463)
tmiddles wrote:Should everyone, Mr. Martin included, be walking around with a gun.

Aaaahhh, the all-too-predictable gun-craven conflation.

Whether someone keeps and bears arms is entirely up to each individual, but everyone has the RIGHT to do so. A rational person would have worded your question "Should everyone, Mr. Martin included, have the RIGHT to walk around with a gun." The answer is "Yes." However you asked if all individuals should be walking around with guns whether or not they want to be walking around with guns. It is not the case that everyone should be walking around in clown suits and makeup and big red-ball noses whether they want to or not, but everyone should have the RIGHT to walk around in full clown get-up.


.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
19-05-2020 02:07
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3374)
IBdaMann wrote:"Should everyone, Mr. Martin included, have the RIGHT to walk around with a gun."


You're conveniently skipping over the actual context of the situation.

Mr. Martin, being a 17yo boy, was old enough to get shot in the chest but DID NOT have the right to carry a gun. He actually WANTED a gun we later learned.

So dodge all you like but you have yet to answer:
Do you, IBD, think Mr. Martin should have been carrying a gun. Your advise to his father would have been what?
Do you, IBD, think Mr. Martin should have had the right to carry a hand gun, concealed in public, as was Mr. Zimmerman's, at 17. I'm assuming that's a yes? Then how about when Mr. Martin was 10 years old?

Seem like a wild question? Not having regulations of any kind is a wild policy for a lethal weapon.

Still in this topic like an elephant in the room is your apparent belief that any citizen can pull a gun on the police when they attempt to act on a search warrant and simply refuse because they don't wanna.

That the government can't have any authority at all but a nut like Zimmerman can play Judge Dredd really calls into question your objectivity on a government policy for anything, be it Covid-19 or managing the environment.

Maybe you're just an anarchist IBD?

https://www.thedailybeast.com/george-zimmerman-taunts-trayvon-martins-parents-they-didnt-raise-their-son-right

2017
"In an interview with The Daily Beast this week, ..."They didn't raise their son right. ..." Zimmerman said of Martin.

This man still has a gun.
Edited on 19-05-2020 02:56
19-05-2020 05:26
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13291)
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:"Should everyone, Mr. Martin included, have the RIGHT to walk around with a gun."


You're conveniently skipping over the actual context of the situation.

No, he MADE the actual context of the situation. It is YOU that is conveniently trying to avoid it at all costs. Mantra 17...16b...
tmiddles wrote:
Mr. Martin, being a 17yo boy, was old enough to get shot in the chest but DID NOT have the right to carry a gun. He actually WANTED a gun we later learned.

So dodge all you like but you have yet to answer:

Mantra 29. RQAA.
tmiddles wrote:
Do you, IBD, think Mr. Martin should have been carrying a gun. Your advise to his father would have been what?
Do you, IBD, think Mr. Martin should have had the right to carry a hand gun, concealed in public, as was Mr. Zimmerman's, at 17. I'm assuming that's a yes? Then how about when Mr. Martin was 10 years old?

Seem like a wild question? Not having regulations of any kind is a wild policy for a lethal weapon.

Mantra 29...16c...39o...
tmiddles wrote:
Still in this topic like an elephant in the room is your apparent belief that any citizen can pull a gun on the police when they attempt to act on a search warrant and simply refuse because they don't wanna.

Shooting people is not serving a search warrant. Mantra 39g.
tmiddles wrote:
That the government can't have any authority at all but a nut like Zimmerman can play Judge Dredd really calls into question your objectivity on a government policy for anything, be it Covid-19 or managing the environment.

The government has the authority granted to it by the Constitution forming that government AND NOTHING ELSE. Mantra 29...39o...
tmiddles wrote:
Maybe you're just an anarchist IBD?

Redefinition fallacy. A republic is not an anarchy. Mantra 10.
tmiddles wrote:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/george-zimmerman-taunts-trayvon-martins-parents-they-didnt-raise-their-son-right

2017
"In an interview with The Daily Beast this week, ..."They didn't raise their son right. ..." Zimmerman said of Martin.

This man still has a gun.

He has the right to carry a gun. Mantra 39p.

No argument presented. Justification of tyranny. RQAA.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
19-05-2020 06:06
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3374)
Into the Night wrote:
The government has the authority granted to it by the Constitution forming that government AND NOTHING ELSE.
So they have the right to act on a search warrant?

And no that does not mean you politely knock and wait for the suspect to read the warrant and then agree to let you in.

4th amendment:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Guess what.
"probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation," and we're done.

Wilson v. Arkansas,182 the Court determined that the common law "knock and announce" rule is an element of the Fourth Amendment reasonableness inquiry. The rule is merely a presumption, however, that yields under various circumstances, including those posing a threat of physical violence to officers,
19-05-2020 06:45
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13291)
tmiddles wrote:...deleted Mantras 16b...29...4b...


The 4th amendment does not cancel the 2nd amendment. No court has the authority to change the Constitution. Killing people is not serving a search warrant.

No argument presented. Justification of tyranny. Denial of the Constitution of the United States.
RQAA.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
Edited on 19-05-2020 06:45
19-05-2020 10:34
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3374)
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:...deleted Mantras 16b...29...4b...

The 4th amendment does not cancel the 2nd amendment


Excercising your 2nd amendment rights can get you shot dead and often does.

Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.

The Branch Davidians would not have died, not a one, if they hadn't had guns.

So you failed to argue how the 4th amendment does not show that the raid on Waco was permitted by our constitution.
19-05-2020 20:53
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13291)
tmiddles wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:...deleted Mantras 16b...29...4b...

The 4th amendment does not cancel the 2nd amendment


Excercising your 2nd amendment rights can get you shot dead and often does.

Not exercising your 2nd amendment rights can get you shot dead and often does.
tmiddles wrote:
Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.

No one is forcing you to carry weapon. If you want to go around defenseless, that's up to you.
tmiddles wrote:
The Branch Davidians would not have died, not a one, if they hadn't had guns.

Speculation. Irrelevant. What happened, happened. You can't change what happened.
tmiddles wrote:
So you failed to argue how the 4th amendment does not show that the raid on Waco was permitted by our constitution.

It doesn't. You seem to have a basic illiteracy how republics work. Understandable, since you have been advocating tyranny for some time now.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
19-05-2020 21:00
HarveyH55
★★★★★
(2399)
tmiddles wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:...deleted Mantras 16b...29...4b...

The 4th amendment does not cancel the 2nd amendment


Excercising your 2nd amendment rights can get you shot dead and often does.

Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.

The Branch Davidians would not have died, not a one, if they hadn't had guns.

So you failed to argue how the 4th amendment does not show that the raid on Waco was permitted by our constitution.


Didn't they blow themselves up? Maybe I got them confused with a different cult.

Wonder if the FBI would raid the IPCC like that, if someone called in a tip, that there was child porn on their climate model computers...
19-05-2020 23:08
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13291)
HarveyH55 wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:...deleted Mantras 16b...29...4b...

The 4th amendment does not cancel the 2nd amendment


Excercising your 2nd amendment rights can get you shot dead and often does.

Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.

The Branch Davidians would not have died, not a one, if they hadn't had guns.

So you failed to argue how the 4th amendment does not show that the raid on Waco was permitted by our constitution.


Didn't they blow themselves up? Maybe I got them confused with a different cult.

Wonder if the FBI would raid the IPCC like that, if someone called in a tip, that there was child porn on their climate model computers...


You are thinking of a different cult.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
20-05-2020 02:10
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(7463)
tmiddles wrote: Mr. Martin, being a 17yo boy, was old enough to get shot in the chest but DID NOT have the right to carry a gun. He actually WANTED a gun we later learned.

Treyvon was the criminal. He was the thug who would have otherwise been tried as an adult for felony assault if not murder 2. George Zimmerman was the small, chubby, weak victim upon whom Treyvon preyed and probably would have killed if he had been allowed to continually bash Zimmerman's head into the concrete until the munchies became unbearable, forcing him to stop and eat his Skittles.

When robbers who are thwarted in their attempts to knock off a liquor store or a pawn shop and who later wish they had had a gun so that they would not have been thwarted, we don't typically bash on the thwarting proprietor for having had the means to successfully thwart the crime and we don't typically feel sympathetic for the criminal ...

... except you do. That's despicable.

Why do you lobby for violent criminals to terrorize society with impunity?


tmiddles wrote: So dodge all you like but you have yet to answer:

Liar. I thoroughly answered your questions and you read it all. Instead of asking me to repeat my answers, YOU explain why you need for law abiding citizens to remain defenseless before violent criminals.

tmiddles wrote: Seem like a wild question? Not having regulations of any kind is a wild policy for a lethal weapon.

Answer me this straightforward question: Should children be allowed to play little league baseball? Should they be allowed to have a bat at home with which to practice, that was purchased without any ID or any background check?

Of course, all lethal weapons have their differing characteristics, but you acknowledge that baseball bats are lethal weapons, yes?

I think we're done on this topic, unless you really want to continue. I will be elated to oblige if you do.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
20-05-2020 04:33
HarveyH55
★★★★★
(2399)
George Zimmerman has been a victim, of his own stupidity, his whole life. He desperately needed to prove he wasn't a 'loser'. If he was in fear for his life, and needed to care a firearm, he should be messing with people. As Neighborhood Watch, the police would have made it perfectly clear, he was only to observe and report, not interact, and never carry a firearm. The police teach those guidelines, to avoid the exact situation Zimmerman created. He ignored everything he was taught. He knew better, was well informed. It wasn't ignorance. Trayvon hadn't committed a crime, or was likely to commit a crime, until Zimmerman interacted.
20-05-2020 05:41
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(7463)
HarveyH55 wrote: As Neighborhood Watch, the police would have made it perfectly clear, he was only to observe and report, not interact, and never carry a firearm.

Harvey, you're a straight shooter ... but you have three egregious errors in this statement above.

Please indulge me explaining my point of view.

If I were looking out for my neighborhood (which is totally legal) and I were to see some punk surveying a house in a suspicious manner, I would report it (also totally legal). If, after having called for the police to arrive, I were to fear that said individual might get away, I might very well follow the suspect to ensure the police question him (also completely legal). I have given up trying to undertand why there was such a rush to malign Zimmerman for doing exactly what I have described above (which is a noble thing to do) while working double-time to pull the lamest excuses out of their asses to defend Treyvon's obvious plan to break-and-enter. People like you keep reiterating how "Treyvon Martin MIGHT have had business at that house he was surveilling ... BUT HE DIDN'T. We can look back and verify that yes, he was planning on robbing that place. So please explain why you support that, and why you continue to malign Zimmerman for trying to prevent it. Hindsight is 20/20. We don't have to second-guess Zimmerman. We can confirm that he was correct. He was in the right. Why continue to bash him? Do we have an agenda here?

The police might have done many things, in the subjunctive ... but Zimmerman spoke to 9-1-1 operators who are supposed to do their job and report. They do not issue instructions. They can issue general context-free advice and recommendations but they they are not experts in anything and they are not knoweldgeable in the myriad of specifics unique to each case. They are simply voices at the other end of the phone whose job is to relay the caller's instructions to the proper responders.

Also, there is no such thing as Zimmerman "should not have carried a gun." Simply put, yes he should have. 2nd Amendment. Enough said.

HarveyH55 wrote: The police teach those guidelines, to avoid the exact situation Zimmerman created.

The police are not any authority that "teaches" that there is no 2nd Amendment. That is just silly.

Treyvon Martin created the situation, not Zimmerman. Martin was caught surveilling a house to rob it and he visciously attacked a guy who was simply following him. Harvey, you are dead wrong on this. Treyvon Martin caused it and he got what he deserved. For the life of me I cannot figure out why you malign someone for trying to stay alive after being jumped. I just don't get it.

HarveyH55 wrote: Trayvon hadn't committed a crime, or was likely to commit a crime, until Zimmerman interacted.

Zimmerman hadn't committed any crime. You are treating him as though he had committed a terrible crime ... of trying to protect his neighborhood. Tryvon Martin was simply PLANNING to commit a crime ... one that Zimmerman aimed to prevent. Did I mention that Zimmerman didn't commit any crime. Are you aware that unless there is a restraining order, it is perfectly legal to follow someone? Perfectly legal.

Teyvon Martin DID commit a crime, a violent one, when he attacked Zimmerman with intent to kill (apparent).

Treyvon Martin is the only bad guy in this equation. Yes, Zimmerman might very well have been an ashsole. Does that make Zimmerman guilty of crimes and excuse Treyvon Martin of possibly attempted murder? It seems like you think it does.

Look, my point is that this whole situtation was so completely one-sided, i.e Treyvon Martin was the viscious criminal and Zimmerman was just FOLLOWING Martin to ensure he was questioned by authorities, and yet so many people are misplacing blame, i.e. maligning Zimmerman and treating Treyvon like a martyr. It's mind boggling.


.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
20-05-2020 11:21
HarveyH55
★★★★★
(2399)
Neighborhood Watch, receive training from the local police department. It wasn't the dispatcher. It wasn't about the 2nd amendment. Neighborhood Watch are not vigilantes, nor are they trained to act as such. Every townhouse in that gated community, was almost exactly the same, The HOA keeps the exterior very consistent, the landscaping, everything throughout the community. Even Zimmerman had to get out of his truck to check the street sign, while talking to 911. He lived there for a couple years, patrolled daily, and still didn't know. As you pointed out, looking is not a crime. Why is it okay for Zimmerman to follow Trayvon around, looking at him. But it's not okay for Trayvon to look at townhouses, trying to figure out where he was? That's what Zimmerman called into 911, a black man on a sidewalk, looked at a building. George wasn't following at a discreet distance. He even stated on the 911 call, that Trayvon had spotted him following. He wasn't observing at that point, but actively pursuing. Again, his Neighborhood Watch training is ignored. Looking at a building, is not a crime.
20-05-2020 13:50
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13291)
HarveyH55 wrote:
Neighborhood Watch, receive training from the local police department. It wasn't the dispatcher. It wasn't about the 2nd amendment. Neighborhood Watch are not vigilantes, nor are they trained to act as such. Every townhouse in that gated community, was almost exactly the same, The HOA keeps the exterior very consistent, the landscaping, everything throughout the community. Even Zimmerman had to get out of his truck to check the street sign, while talking to 911. He lived there for a couple years, patrolled daily, and still didn't know. As you pointed out, looking is not a crime. Why is it okay for Zimmerman to follow Trayvon around, looking at him. But it's not okay for Trayvon to look at townhouses, trying to figure out where he was? That's what Zimmerman called into 911, a black man on a sidewalk, looked at a building. George wasn't following at a discreet distance. He even stated on the 911 call, that Trayvon had spotted him following. He wasn't observing at that point, but actively pursuing. Again, his Neighborhood Watch training is ignored. Looking at a building, is not a crime.


Actually, looking at a building can be a crime. It's called 'trespass'.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
21-05-2020 02:24
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3374)
Into the Night wrote:
Speculation. Irrelevant. What happened, happened. You can't change what happened.


So in discussing how the US is run, what's wrong with that, and how it could be run differently, you're ruling out "speculation" and dismissing any analysis of the past as "What happened, happened."

Well with that you can run away even faster from debating anything.

And you know what? When you're done running? Wherever you go, there you are.

Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
So you failed to argue how the 4th amendment does not show that the raid on Waco was permitted by our constitution.

It doesn't.
And your argument is?

HarveyH55 wrote:
Didn't they blow themselves up? Maybe I got them confused with a different cult....
No an I think it was murder personally. Same with Ruby Ridge. A total disgrace.

How does that change the perspective that the Dravidians were or were not "protected" by their little guns or that the authorities have the right to act on a search warrant without the permission of the suspects being searched?

IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote: So dodge all you like but you have yet to answer:

Liar. I thoroughly answered your questions and you read it all.
Nope this is just how you like to dodge. You did not and have not answered.

I'll ask again:
Do you, IBD, think Mr. Martin should have been carrying a gun. Your advise to his father would have been what?
Do you, IBD, think Mr. Martin should have had the right to carry a hand gun, concealed in public, as was Mr. Zimmerman's, at 17. I'm assuming that's a yes? Then how about when Mr. Martin was 10 years old?

All you do is ask more of your own questions.

IBdaMann wrote:Should they be allowed to have a bat at home with which to practice, that was purchased without any ID or any background check?
Of course bats should be legal. I don't think a bat is equivalent with a gun do you? If you do I guess you don't need gun rights since you can just have bat rights.

This is the stupid NRA logic warmed over: If they didn't have a gun they'd kill with something else!

Except they wouldn't .

Paddock killed 58 people and wounded 413 in Vegas firing just over a 1000 rounds in just 10 minutes because of the guns the NRA had fought to keep legal.

IBdaMann wrote:I think we're done on this topic,
Your surrendering is become a common occurrence.

Has it ever occured to you Zimmerman could have used a taser?
Edited on 21-05-2020 02:25
21-05-2020 04:39
HarveyH55
★★★★★
(2399)
Into the Night wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
Neighborhood Watch, receive training from the local police department. It wasn't the dispatcher. It wasn't about the 2nd amendment. Neighborhood Watch are not vigilantes, nor are they trained to act as such. Every townhouse in that gated community, was almost exactly the same, The HOA keeps the exterior very consistent, the landscaping, everything throughout the community. Even Zimmerman had to get out of his truck to check the street sign, while talking to 911. He lived there for a couple years, patrolled daily, and still didn't know. As you pointed out, looking is not a crime. Why is it okay for Zimmerman to follow Trayvon around, looking at him. But it's not okay for Trayvon to look at townhouses, trying to figure out where he was? That's what Zimmerman called into 911, a black man on a sidewalk, looked at a building. George wasn't following at a discreet distance. He even stated on the 911 call, that Trayvon had spotted him following. He wasn't observing at that point, but actively pursuing. Again, his Neighborhood Watch training is ignored. Looking at a building, is not a crime.


Actually, looking at a building can be a crime. It's called 'trespass'.


From the public sidewalk? Even Zimmerman made no statement about Trayvon leaving the side walk, until after had gotten out of the truck. He witness no crime being committed, nor saw anything to make him suspect there had been a crime (no vandalism, broken car windows, white women screaming hysterically). Had there been an actual crime, to prompt George's initial 911 call, with good reason to believe Trayvon was involved. I wouldn't care so much about the outcome.
21-05-2020 05:36
James___
★★★★★
(3166)
HarveyH55 wrote:
Neighborhood Watch, receive training from the local police department. It wasn't the dispatcher. It wasn't about the 2nd amendment. Neighborhood Watch are not vigilantes, nor are they trained to act as such. Every townhouse in that gated community, was almost exactly the same, The HOA keeps the exterior very consistent, the landscaping, everything throughout the community. Even Zimmerman had to get out of his truck to check the street sign, while talking to 911. He lived there for a couple years, patrolled daily, and still didn't know. As you pointed out, looking is not a crime. Why is it okay for Zimmerman to follow Trayvon around, looking at him. But it's not okay for Trayvon to look at townhouses, trying to figure out where he was? That's what Zimmerman called into 911, a black man on a sidewalk, looked at a building. George wasn't following at a discreet distance. He even stated on the 911 call, that Trayvon had spotted him following. He wasn't observing at that point, but actively pursuing. Again, his Neighborhood Watch training is ignored. Looking at a building, is not a crime.



You are right on all aspects. With the recent killing, it seems to be more 2 racist individuals than anything else. But as gasguzler would say, the pop and his son felt threatened by a jogger. Like if someone liked killing Norwegians like what happened to Christopher Bergan. His father in law did nothing wrong by killing him. Someone knocked on pops door and pops shot him.
Kind of like that Norwegian jet stream that gas guzzler talks about. Someone bothers us, we deal with it. Problem solved.
21-05-2020 09:08
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13291)
tmiddles wrote:...deleted Mantras 29...17...29...29...29...29...lie...29...29...29...29...29...29...29...29...30...31...23...26...29...15
Has it ever occured to you Zimmerman could have used a taser?


He could have used a gun too. He is allowed to have either weapon or both. Tasers are pretty useless when you are on the ground and being attacked.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
21-05-2020 09:14
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13291)
HarveyH55 wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
Neighborhood Watch, receive training from the local police department. It wasn't the dispatcher. It wasn't about the 2nd amendment. Neighborhood Watch are not vigilantes, nor are they trained to act as such. Every townhouse in that gated community, was almost exactly the same, The HOA keeps the exterior very consistent, the landscaping, everything throughout the community. Even Zimmerman had to get out of his truck to check the street sign, while talking to 911. He lived there for a couple years, patrolled daily, and still didn't know. As you pointed out, looking is not a crime. Why is it okay for Zimmerman to follow Trayvon around, looking at him. But it's not okay for Trayvon to look at townhouses, trying to figure out where he was? That's what Zimmerman called into 911, a black man on a sidewalk, looked at a building. George wasn't following at a discreet distance. He even stated on the 911 call, that Trayvon had spotted him following. He wasn't observing at that point, but actively pursuing. Again, his Neighborhood Watch training is ignored. Looking at a building, is not a crime.


Actually, looking at a building can be a crime. It's called 'trespass'.


From the public sidewalk?

Yes. From the public sidewalk. Peering in windows, watching the place for activity (so-called 'casing the joint') is in and of itself a crime of trespass in some jurisdictions.

HarveyH55 wrote:
Even Zimmerman made no statement about Trayvon leaving the side walk, until after had gotten out of the truck. He witness no crime being committed, nor saw anything to make him suspect there had been a crime (no vandalism, broken car windows, white women screaming hysterically). Had there been an actual crime, to prompt George's initial 911 call, with good reason to believe Trayvon was involved. I wouldn't care so much about the outcome.

In the end it was irrelevant. The jury acquitted him of the crime of murder and ruled it was justifiable homicide (self defense). His trial is done. It's over. We don't get to judge him again for the same event.

What prompted him to call 911 or how many times he calls 911 is irrelevant.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
21-05-2020 09:24
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(7463)
tmiddles wrote: Nope this is just how you like to dodge.

Nope. This is how you like to lie.

tmiddles wrote: You did not and have not answered.

I have answered you thoroughly too many times because I apparently don't learn my lesson. You are a sociopath and you can take a hike.

tmiddles wrote: I'll ask again:

Don't bother, I won't answer yet again. You can go back and read the last time I answer this question.

tmiddles wrote: Of course bats should be legal. I don't think a bat is equivalent with a gun do you?

Sorry, I already addressed the unique differences all lethal weapons have. The reason you are fine with everyone, including ten-year-olds, owning lethal weapons of all kinds willy-nilly without background checks as long as those lethal weapons are not guns is because you are a gun craven, i.e. the problem is with you, not with that particular inanimate object.

That is so worth repeating. The problem is with YOU.

Sociopaths like you will lock themselves in an eternal death-struggle to ban the object of their psychosis ... and if they should somehow become successful in getting it banned, they shift the objects of psychosis to something else and labor tirelessly to get THAT banned. You can never be forthwith reasoned because your issue is a mental problem, not some concern for anyone's safety. If you were actually concerned about people's safety you would be encouraging them to get armed and to get trained.

Did I mention that the problem is on your end?


.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
21-05-2020 13:01
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3374)
IBdaMann wrote:
tmiddles wrote: You did not and have not answered.

I have answered you thoroughly too many times ...
No you most certainly did not. I've asked several questions around this same concept and you ducked them all.

IBdaMann wrote:...you are fine with ...lethal weapons...as long as those lethal weapons are not guns...
Guns are very effective at killing people both when it's intended and on accident.
Number of toddlers to accidentally kill themselves with baseball bats each year:
With guns: ~70

USA #1

Now I know, you're going to point to all the cricket bat deaths in the UK and some other stats on those other "lethal weapons" but good luck finding any "valid data sets" to support that buddy.

Saw this graphic. Weird, isn't California like a MUCH bigger state than North Carolina? Must be some blue state magic going on here:
link

I sure somewhere at sometime there was a baseball bat mishap but I would think fingers and toes more than internal organs would be damaged in those.
21-05-2020 16:02
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(7463)
tmiddles wrote: No you most certainly did not.

Yes, I most certainly did. ... and you can expect that I won't be wasting any more time. I'm trying to recall the last time that you actually acknowledged one of my answers and I honestly cannot think of any at the moment.

So, stop your griping. I remain unmoved.

tmiddles wrote: Guns are very effective at killing people both when it's intended and on accident.

So are baseball bats. You're doing it again. You are wasting time. I have already adressed the point of differing lethal weapons having differing characteristics and you continuing to argue that differing lethal weapons however have differing characteristics.

We agree. Move on.

tmiddles wrote: Now I know, you're going to point to all the cricket bat deaths in the UK

No, I'm not, because the number of deaths involving a particular lethal weapon have no bearing on whether it is a lethal weapon. An you have already explained how you are just fine with lethal weapons being owned by ten-year-olds, willy-nilly, in unlimited quantities, acquired without any background checks, except for those inanimate objects that coincidentally pertain to your irrational phobia ... so let's talk about how all of society must adjust to accomodate people with irrational fears. For example, let's discuss how we should ban tall buildings just because there are people with acrophobia. Right? Let's talk about that. And why aren't we eradicating spiders everywhere? We have people right here in the US who are afflicted with arachnaphobia. We have a lot of work to do before we can even entertain your hoplophobia.

Tall buildings. Wait, remind me why should we ban them. Oh yeah ... because there are a few nutcases who fear them more than they fear death by toture.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
21-05-2020 19:14
HarveyH55
★★★★★
(2399)
Into the Night wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
Neighborhood Watch, receive training from the local police department. It wasn't the dispatcher. It wasn't about the 2nd amendment. Neighborhood Watch are not vigilantes, nor are they trained to act as such. Every townhouse in that gated community, was almost exactly the same, The HOA keeps the exterior very consistent, the landscaping, everything throughout the community. Even Zimmerman had to get out of his truck to check the street sign, while talking to 911. He lived there for a couple years, patrolled daily, and still didn't know. As you pointed out, looking is not a crime. Why is it okay for Zimmerman to follow Trayvon around, looking at him. But it's not okay for Trayvon to look at townhouses, trying to figure out where he was? That's what Zimmerman called into 911, a black man on a sidewalk, looked at a building. George wasn't following at a discreet distance. He even stated on the 911 call, that Trayvon had spotted him following. He wasn't observing at that point, but actively pursuing. Again, his Neighborhood Watch training is ignored. Looking at a building, is not a crime.


Actually, looking at a building can be a crime. It's called 'trespass'.


From the public sidewalk?

Yes. From the public sidewalk. Peering in windows, watching the place for activity (so-called 'casing the joint') is in and of itself a crime of trespass in some jurisdictions.

HarveyH55 wrote:
Even Zimmerman made no statement about Trayvon leaving the side walk, until after had gotten out of the truck. He witness no crime being committed, nor saw anything to make him suspect there had been a crime (no vandalism, broken car windows, white women screaming hysterically). Had there been an actual crime, to prompt George's initial 911 call, with good reason to believe Trayvon was involved. I wouldn't care so much about the outcome.

In the end it was irrelevant. The jury acquitted him of the crime of murder and ruled it was justifiable homicide (self defense). His trial is done. It's over. We don't get to judge him again for the same event.

What prompted him to call 911 or how many times he calls 911 is irrelevant.


'We', obviously don't attend the same church services...
21-05-2020 21:13
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3374)
IBdaMann wrote:
... the number of deaths involving a particular lethal weapon have no bearing on whether it is a lethal weapon. ....


How would you determine the problem a lethal weapon poses to society? You have something better than a body count to go by?

Take machine guns, real ones, held by legal license holders. I was wrong that they are never legal they are just rarely legal. Only some states allow a pre 1986 antique to be owned.

They have not been used in terrorist, wacko or criminal crimes.

They don"t matter. Neither do baseball bats.

Hand Guns from Walmart do matter.

A lot of people of all ages die.

Your false premiss that the death count would not change without guns is unsupported by you or anyone.
Edited on 21-05-2020 21:15
22-05-2020 01:55
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13291)
tmiddles wrote:...deleted Mantra 4c...9a...9b...39o...


No argument presented. Bigotry. Hoplophobia.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
Edited on 22-05-2020 01:55
22-05-2020 01:57
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13291)
HarveyH55 wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
HarveyH55 wrote:
Neighborhood Watch, receive training from the local police department. It wasn't the dispatcher. It wasn't about the 2nd amendment. Neighborhood Watch are not vigilantes, nor are they trained to act as such. Every townhouse in that gated community, was almost exactly the same, The HOA keeps the exterior very consistent, the landscaping, everything throughout the community. Even Zimmerman had to get out of his truck to check the street sign, while talking to 911. He lived there for a couple years, patrolled daily, and still didn't know. As you pointed out, looking is not a crime. Why is it okay for Zimmerman to follow Trayvon around, looking at him. But it's not okay for Trayvon to look at townhouses, trying to figure out where he was? That's what Zimmerman called into 911, a black man on a sidewalk, looked at a building. George wasn't following at a discreet distance. He even stated on the 911 call, that Trayvon had spotted him following. He wasn't observing at that point, but actively pursuing. Again, his Neighborhood Watch training is ignored. Looking at a building, is not a crime.


Actually, looking at a building can be a crime. It's called 'trespass'.


From the public sidewalk?

Yes. From the public sidewalk. Peering in windows, watching the place for activity (so-called 'casing the joint') is in and of itself a crime of trespass in some jurisdictions.

HarveyH55 wrote:
Even Zimmerman made no statement about Trayvon leaving the side walk, until after had gotten out of the truck. He witness no crime being committed, nor saw anything to make him suspect there had been a crime (no vandalism, broken car windows, white women screaming hysterically). Had there been an actual crime, to prompt George's initial 911 call, with good reason to believe Trayvon was involved. I wouldn't care so much about the outcome.

In the end it was irrelevant. The jury acquitted him of the crime of murder and ruled it was justifiable homicide (self defense). His trial is done. It's over. We don't get to judge him again for the same event.

What prompted him to call 911 or how many times he calls 911 is irrelevant.


'We', obviously don't attend the same church services...

Obviously. I have never seen you there.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
22-05-2020 02:04
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13291)
tmiddles wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
... the number of deaths involving a particular lethal weapon have no bearing on whether it is a lethal weapon. ....


How would you determine the problem a lethal weapon poses to society?

it doesn't. It's not a problem. You are presuming it is. Compositional error fallacy. Mantra 9a.
tmiddles wrote:
You have something better than a body count to go by?

Unrelated. Compositional error fallacy. Mantra 9a.
tmiddles wrote:
Take machine guns, real ones, held by legal license holders. I was wrong that they are never legal they are just rarely legal. Only some states allow a pre 1986 antique to be owned.

All guns are legal to own. No license required. The requirement of a license is in and of itself, an illegal law.
tmiddles wrote:
They have not been used in terrorist, wacko or criminal crimes.

Yes they have.
tmiddles wrote:
They don"t matter. Neither do baseball bats.

Apparently both matter to you. You keep bringing them up.
tmiddles wrote:
Hand Guns from Walmart do matter.

Why? Just because Walmart happens to sell a pistol doesn't mean someone is going to go out and start shooting people with it. Bigotry. Mantra 9b.
tmiddles wrote:
A lot of people of all ages die.

Irrelevant. Not all die from gunshot wounds. Mantra 9b.
tmiddles wrote:
Your false premiss that the death count would not change without guns is unsupported by you or anyone.

Irrelevance fallacy. False relation. Mantra 25f...24a...

You do not get to dictate who can own a gun. You do not get to dictate what kind of weapon anyone can own or use. You are not the king.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
22-05-2020 02:10
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3374)
Into the Night wrote:
All guns are legal to own. No license required. The requirement of a license is in and of itself, an illegal law.
Ah there we have it summed up nicely!

You believe your person interpretation of the Constitution is the right one. You believe you can overrule the Supreme court! Interesting.

Our Constitution is setup with a method of determining what is legal and illegal. It delegates authority for that. It also delegates authority for interpreting the Constitution and I'm very sorry but it's not you alone ITN.

You are not using the words "legal" and "illegal" as they are normally used.

Suffice to say you can not dispute that owning many weapons is "against the law".
22-05-2020 06:16
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13291)
tmiddles wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
All guns are legal to own. No license required. The requirement of a license is in and of itself, an illegal law.
Ah there we have it summed up nicely!

You believe your person interpretation of the Constitution is the right one. You believe you can overrule the Supreme court! Interesting.

The Supreme Court has no authority to change or interpret the Constitution. See Article III of the Constitution of the United States.
tmiddles wrote:
Our Constitution is setup with a method of determining what is legal and illegal. It delegates authority for that. It also delegates authority for interpreting the Constitution and I'm very sorry but it's not you alone ITN.

The Constitution has no such method defined on whether any part of the Constitution is legal or not. Only the States have authority to interpret, change, or even abolish the Constitution. The Court has NO authority in this area at all.
tmiddles wrote:
You are not using the words "legal" and "illegal" as they are normally used.

Yes I am.
tmiddles wrote:
Suffice to say you can not dispute that owning many weapons is "against the law".

It is not against the law. There is no limit on the number of weapons one may own declared in the 2nd amendment or anywhere else in the Constitution. The 2nd amendment forbids the federal government from passing such a law. That amendment is also binding upon the States.

If any State tries to pass such a law, the law itself is illegal and can be ignored. Further, the State can be sued to require it to comply with the 2nd amendment.

You don't get to decide how many guns someone may own. You don't get to decide whether someone may own or carry a gun. You don't get to change the Constitution of the United States. You are not the king.

No argument presented. Denial of constitutions as law. Attempted justification of tyranny. Hoplophobia.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
22-05-2020 06:35
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3374)
Into the Night wrote:....
The Supreme Court has no authority to...interpret the Constitution.

Gee I wonder how they have managed to!

Do you agree with the following:
"the Constitution is law, then presumably its meaning, like that of all other law, is the meaning the lawmakers were understood to have intended"link

That the 2nd amendment should be read in light of what the drafters intended?
22-05-2020 23:54
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13291)
tmiddles wrote:
Into the Night wrote:....
The Supreme Court has no authority to...interpret the Constitution.

Gee I wonder how they have managed to!

Illegally.
tmiddles wrote:
Do you agree with the following:
"the Constitution is law, then presumably its meaning, like that of all other law, is the meaning the lawmakers were understood to have intended"link

No.
tmiddles wrote:
That the 2nd amendment should be read in light of what the drafters intended?

No. The 2nd amendment should be read and recognized, like everything else in the Constitution.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
24-05-2020 06:40
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3374)
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
That the 2nd amendment should be read in light of what the drafters intended?

No. The 2nd amendment should be read and recognized, like everything else in the Constitution.


So how do you know what the words mean? We've established your opposition to the dictionary.

Maybe the 2nd amendment entitles us all to delicious bear arms! The tastiest part of any bear.



I know why you are ducking this simple and obvious necessity to read meaning into language. You know full well the drafters of the constitution instituted, believed in and expected gun control.
24-05-2020 21:54
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13291)
tmiddles wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
tmiddles wrote:
That the 2nd amendment should be read in light of what the drafters intended?

No. The 2nd amendment should be read and recognized, like everything else in the Constitution.


So how do you know what the words mean? We've established your opposition to the dictionary.

Your problem. The fact that you do not speak English is your problem. The Constitution of the United States is written in English.
tmiddles wrote:
Maybe the 2nd amendment entitles us all to delicious bear arms! The tastiest part of any bear.


An old and stupid meme.
tmiddles wrote:
I know why you are ducking this simple and obvious necessity to read meaning into language. You know full well the drafters of the constitution instituted, believed in and expected gun control.

You don't get to speak for the drafters of the Constitution. You only get to speak for you. Mantra 31.

There is no mention of 'gun control' or any other 'weapon control' in the 2nd amendment.

All weapons are legal. All guns are legal.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
25-05-2020 01:32
tmiddlesProfile picture★★★★★
(3374)
Into the Night wrote:
There is no mention of 'gun control' or any other 'weapon control' in the 2nd amendment.



How do you define "regulated"?

The 2nd amendment does not say:
A well regulated militia. Also, unrelated to the militia, an unregulated private right to bear arms.

The 2nd amendment is clearly directed to only a militia. It's one sentence, not two.

There are multiple examples of this being the perspective at the time of the drafting, before and after. Public carry of fire arms, the legality of pistols and knives, have always been "regulated".
25-05-2020 04:31
Into the NightProfile picture★★★★★
(13291)
tmiddles wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
There is no mention of 'gun control' or any other 'weapon control' in the 2nd amendment.



How do you define "regulated"?

RQAA.
tmiddles wrote:
The 2nd amendment does not say:
A well regulated militia. Also, unrelated to the militia, an unregulated private right to bear arms.

The militia is not a condition.
tmiddles wrote:
The 2nd amendment is clearly directed to only a militia. It's one sentence, not two.

It is one sentence discussing two similar rights, both about the right of self defense. RQAA.
tmiddles wrote:
There are multiple examples of this being the perspective at the time of the drafting, before and after. Public carry of fire arms, the legality of pistols and knives, have always been "regulated".

Regulation does not mean banning. Redefinition fallacy. Mantra 10. RQAA.
Militias membership is not required to own a gun or any other weapon.

To bad you never learned English.


The Parrot Killer

Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles

Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit
Page 8 of 20<<<678910>>>





Join the debate One reason for social distancing/isolation:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Safe Distancing Video004-04-2020 06:28
Wind power is the earliest way to generate power, but there's a reason it stopped being used.1321-02-2020 20:12
Reason why companies are not converting to 100% electric, focusing on Porsche1806-12-2019 23:29
Is reason for climate change correct?4830-08-2019 03:14
Why we won't approach the real reason behind climate change.6819-08-2019 07:18
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2020 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact