CrazyDogg77
Member
A pretty good argument for gun control.
And the thread has become cyclical.
A pretty good argument for gun control.
As has been said (or should be said), simply getting beat up by one guy is not considered "grievous bodily harm" for which discharge of a firearm is warranted. Now if he was jumped by several guys, that's different. but one on one vs a guy with skittles...
No one under the age of 18 should be able to buy a butterknife
Those black people...they're good at improvising
shh dont take it seriously
Like I said, I don't know any specifics about the case. Was the black guy 140lbs? I have no idea, I skimmed the first page and jumped to the last like everyone does. If Prosthetic had that information, he should have focused his argument on their size/weight rather than their age--as age really makes no sense. We're talking about gangbanger's because it's a verifiable example of "kids" that routinely beat people to death. I know you're trying to imply that was a racist remark, but gangbangers are a diverse group--commonly white, black, latino, and every color in between. It's also likely to be the white guys defense, that he thought the black kid was a gangbanger out on initiation or something.
Can you prove that this uppity black youth wasn't intending on using these hard-shelled candies as lethal projectiles a la Marvel Comics' Bullseye? Can you? Than you must acquit. /KHarvey
Hope this guy gets punished to the full extent of the law.
Time after time posters in this thread demonstrate their complete lack of understanding. I'm done here for the time being and will head back when the results of the investigation get passed on to the state, which should be within a week.
Before I go, I'll make my first two assumptions and share them. The first is, if prosecution is not recommended by the investigation the reason given by the majority in this thread will be that everyone involved is racist, stupid or both. The second is that if prosecution is recommended I'll have to experience the mind numbing stupidity of multiple posters telling me how dumb I must feel for being wrong.
Time after time posters in this thread demonstrate their complete lack of understanding. I'm done here for the time being and will head back when the results of the investigation get passed on to the state, which should be within a week.
Before I go, I'll make my first two assumptions and share them. The first is, if prosecution is not recommended by the investigation the reason given by the majority in this thread will be that everyone involved is racist, stupid or both. The second is that if prosecution is recommended I'll have to experience the mind numbing stupidity of multiple posters telling me how dumb I must feel for being wrong.
Um guys, that dude might be racist yeah, but that's not the biggest problem with him.
The biggest problem is HE IS A MURDERER.
I cannot believe he is not at the very least on house arrest for now.
So initiation was to go grab some skittles and tea?
I don't know the specifics of the case, or whether the two actually got into a physical altercation, but these are foolish assumptions to make without actually seeing those involved. I'm pushing 30, 6', and weigh 135 lbs. A 17 year old "kid" could definitely beat my ass and curb stomp my head. Most 17yo "kids" are for all intents and purposes full grown adults, many of whom weight train and condition for sports. The black guy could have been a lineman on the football team for all we know. It's beyond stupid to say "oh, this guy was in his 20's, there's no way a 17yo posed a thread". You realize most of the gangbangers that go around beating people to death for fun are in their teens, right? And no, I'm not defending the (possibly) racist douche (I have no idea of the details of the case), I was simply correcting your weak argument.
Yea, probably, considering you spent the better part of two days white-knighting a racist murderer. Amazing the extremes you'll take to play devil's advocate:
I don't know the specifics of the case, or whether the two actually got into a physical altercation, but these are foolish assumptions to make without actually seeing those involved. I'm pushing 30, 6', and weigh 135 lbs. A 17 year old "kid" could definitely beat my ass and curb stomp my head. Most 17yo "kids" are for all intents and purposes full grown adults, many of whom weight train and condition for sports. The black guy could have been a lineman on the football team for all we know. It's beyond stupid to say "oh, this guy was in his 20's, there's no way a 17yo posed a thread". You realize most of the gangbangers that go around beating people to death for fun are in their teens, right? And no, I'm not defending the (possibly) racist douche (I have no idea of the details of the case), I was simply correcting your weak argument.
Again, a guy rolls up on you in the middle of the night. He tails you for at least two minutes on the way back from a convenience store. He pulls up beside you and approaches you - and the he's the one that gets to claim self-defense?
I don't understand the people that try and go out of their way for this guy. He's a vigilante that has no issue with racial profiling if nothing else.
Again, a guy rolls up on you in the middle of the night. He tails you for at least two minutes on the way back from a convenience store. He pulls up beside you and approaches you - and the he's the one that gets to claim self-defense?
I don't understand the people that try and go out of their way for this guy. He's a vigilante that has no issue with racial profiling if nothing else.
But it was a racist remark... nowhere in any of the articles or any information released suggested that this kid was a gangbanger. You pulled that little nugget of bullshit straight out of your ass, based off of nothing other than the fact that the kid was black.
The reality is, gang related initiations are the only examples I'm familiar with where "kids" will routinely go and beat random adults to death in random locations. Maybe there are others, but those are the only cases I'm familiar with.
Thread is still going on over the same thing?
Fact is, there's a dead kid now, by fault of this vigilante Nightwatch captain. Whether or not it was self-defense should be assessed in trial, by a jury, and not by god damn, non-proof of whether or not he can be detained.
Fact: Kid is dead
Fact: Man shot him
Should be tried. If it really is self-defense, then I'm sure a jury of his peers will see it as such. If it isn't, well, there you go. I'm sure a jury of his peers will see it as such. But to let him off, not even on bond? Somethings wrong in Florida.
Picking apart a weak argument by inserting gangbanging into the mix out of fucking nowhere?The reality is, gang related initiations are the only examples I'm familiar with where "kids" will routinely go and beat random adults to death in random locations. Maybe there are others, but those are the only cases I'm familiar with. I was merely providing it as an example of why age is a useless metric in a case like this, and it was directed specifically at Prosthetic's comments and Prosthetic's comments only. I was merely picking apart his weak argument, there was no veiled commentary on this actual case intended. Like I said several times, I have no idea of the specifics involved, no idea the white guy may have followed the black kid for 2 minutes, or any of this other stuff.
The reality is, gang related initiations are the only examples I'm familiar with where "kids" will routinely go and beat random adults to death in random locations. Maybe there are others, but those are the only cases I'm familiar with. I was merely providing it as an example of why age is a useless metric in a case like this, and it was directed specifically at Prosthetic's comments and Prosthetic's comments only. I was merely picking apart his weak argument, there was no veiled commentary on this actual case intended. Like I said several times, I have no idea of the specifics involved, no idea the white guy may have followed the black kid for 2 minutes, or any of this other stuff.
Before I go, I'll make my first two assumptions and share them. The first is, if prosecution is not recommended by the investigation the reason given by the majority in this thread will be that everyone involved is racist, stupid or both. The second is that if prosecution is recommended I'll have to experience the mind numbing stupidity of multiple posters telling me how dumb I must feel for being wrong.
Quite a limb you're going out on there with those assumptions. It's not like either of those scenarios would not be deserved.
White knighting? You fucking morons. It's like talking to children.
Please explain to me which part of your argument I'm missing. I believe I got this gist of what you're saying just fine.
I'm glad you decided to gracefully exit this way.White knighting? You fucking morons. It's like talking to children.
I'm glad you decided to gracefully exit this way.
No, the idea that I'm defending a person means you don't understand a damn thing I'm saying or why I'm saying it. I'm not advocating for anyone or arguing for the innocence or guilt of anyone. Why is this so hard to understand? I'm sure that I'm writing in English. You and the two others being so intent on dismissing my position while simultaneously failing to grasp it on the most basic level is a shame and as I said, depressing. My argument is not complicated.
Sorry, the blatant personal attacks inspired me to return. Once we clear these up I'll go back to waiting for the results.
Sorry, the blatant personal attacks inspired me to return. Once we clear these up I'll go back to waiting for the results.
I don't think you're defending him him. Just his possible legal right to shoot someone in the chest.
It's not like you didn't take shots at the people posting in this thread in your goodbye post (which turned out to be.. not so much of a goodbye).
Pointing out the possibility that he may have had a legal right to do so, depending on the details we have yet to hear. That you or anyone else would characterize that dismissively as white knighting is beneath you. Don't fall into that shit.
Picking apart a weak argument by inserting gangbanging into the mix out of fucking nowhere?
Oh, right. Black + young + male x night time ^# of gunshots = "don't count out gang activity... im jus sayin"
Pointing out the possibility that he may have had a legal right to do so, depending on the details we have yet to hear. That you or anyone else would characterize that dismissively as white knighting is beneath you. Don't fall into that shit.
But why? I mean, it would be one thing to just say that he might have a legal right to do so and leave it at that, but for the past 130+ posts of yours in this thread alone(that already says something) you have been 100% on the defensive about the guys right to shoot this person, while actively dismissing any other possibility. You claim indifference and only wanting to see the facts, but yet have only been consistent in defending one party. Either state your intentions or cut the bullshit because frankly it just seems like you have an agenda.
Sorry for not reading this whole thread, but will some justice come from this? Is there a likely arrest in the near future, or is this basically a "case closed" where a murderer goes free and everyone knows it?
White knighting? You fucking morons. It's like talking to children.
You are the one defending a murderer. You continue to defend this man, even with every new piece of evidence confirming that he acted recklessly.
You read what you want to read. I have consistently outlined scenarios and answered questions regarding when the man would be considered guilty of murder or having used the right to defend himself. I even pointed out the key issues that could alone decide his fate. I've made it as clear as I can possibly make it. As you point out, there is no shortage of posts outlining my position and I have never been the only one saying these things either.
If the personal attacks and blatant misrepresentations are over with I'm gonna go back to waiting. Disagree with me as much as you like, please!, but just do me a favor and disagree with things I've actually said.
What is the guy's story? Surely you don't believe he told the cops he shot the boy because he was black and they just moved on. I strongly suspect there is more to this story that hasn't been, and wouldn't be, presented by the lawyer of the child's family. All of our information is coming from him at this point. I don't think it's wise to assume we know everything relevant.
I don't know the specifics of the case, or whether the two actually got into a physical altercation, but these are foolish assumptions to make without actually seeing those involved. I'm pushing 30, 6', and weigh 135 lbs. A 17 year old "kid" could definitely beat my ass and curb stomp my head. Most 17yo "kids" are for all intents and purposes full grown adults, many of whom weight train and condition for sports. The black guy could have been a lineman on the football team for all we know. It's beyond stupid to say "oh, this guy was in his 20's, there's no way a 17yo posed a thread". You realize most of the gangbangers that go around beating people to death for fun are in their teens, right? And no, I'm not defending the (possibly) racist douche (I have no idea of the details of the case), I was simply correcting your weak argument.