toolbox 0 #401 March 26, 2012 How I react to situations now at age 49,and how I reacted at age 17,are vastly different. At age 17, I was far less understanding and patient as I am now at age 49. Lets face it,teens tend to have alot less self control in every aspect than they will achieve as they grow older,wiser,and less hormonal. Teens exhibit bad judgement on a regular basis and tend to have a bit of a chip on the shoulder. Now,I'm not saying this is the case with the shooting,but what if the teen did turn and attack with a fury driven by teenage angst. When I was a teenager,it was not uncommon for kids to go off on someone over something that was of no real importance,simply because they felt disrespected. It seems that kids today have less respect for others,yet demand more respect from others than ever before,and this has nothing to do with race. In recent years so called good kids have commited very bad acts against others with no regard to the safety of others (The kids who dropped the shopping cart on the woman in the mall parking complex,ect,ect,ect) It is not inconcievable that a 17 year old would turn and attack someone(not knowing they had a gun) if they were feeling a little pissed off. I'm pretty sure a teen would not try to fight someone if they thought they might get shot. Just because you are a minor,do's not give you the right to do harm to others,and a 17 year old could kill an adult without any weapons other than hands and shoe clad feet. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #402 March 26, 2012 Quote?? between HIPPA and the general policy of keeping minors' records under wrap, that's an odd presumption. Really? School suspensions go on the students record within the school board. General truculence and fights would have been documented as well. There is always the option that this was Martin's first unprovoked assault. Personally I find that option less likely. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #403 March 26, 2012 QuoteQuote Can't agree. The simple act of following someone could *escalate* into a threat, but is not a threat in and of itself. Therefore, 'continuously retreating' becomes a false premise. The clear act of following someone certainly would be considered a threat. You don't wait for a stalker to attack before deciding you might be in condition yellow or red. Proximity comes into play, as you well know. Someone 50 yards behind you isn't an immediate threat - someone 5 yards behind you *could* be.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,489 #404 March 26, 2012 QuoteI'm sure one of your whimsical reasons will suffice. Good. As long as you acknowledge that they exist, your ridiculous point falls flat.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coreece 190 #405 March 26, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteHow it is now is that blacks are racially accosted so often that they shrug it off as just 'background'. It will be at school, on the street, by the police, by employers, by any racist who thinks they can get away with it. Recently hundreds of thousands of blacks were accosted and stripped of a couple of decades of wealth accumulation by a group of blue eyed, white bankers. again, your argument is that racism exists. It's not an argument it's a statement of fact. Excellent! Now we can just claim racism for everything...our problems are solved! Or we can go to the other extreme and deny that racism affects anything much - and all our problems will keep growing. I think it would be wise to examine the deep rooted issues in the socioeconomic structure and how to relieve the tension caused from packing people into densely populated corners of the country where there simply may not be enough opportunity for everyone to live life happily ever after.Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #406 March 26, 2012 QuoteProximity comes into play, as you well know. Someone 50 yards behind you isn't an immediate threat - someone 5 yards behind you *could* be. And what is being said comes into play. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wlsc 0 #407 March 26, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteHow it is now is that blacks are racially accosted so often that they shrug it off as just 'background'. It will be at school, on the street, by the police, by employers, by any racist who thinks they can get away with it. Recently hundreds of thousands of blacks were accosted and stripped of a couple of decades of wealth accumulation by a group of blue eyed, white bankers. again, your argument is that racism exists. It's not an argument it's a statement of fact. Excellent! Now we can just claim racism for everything...our problems are solved! Or we can go to the other extreme and deny that racism affects anything much - and all our problems will keep growing. I think it would be wise to examine the deep rooted issues in the socioeconomic structure and how to relieve the tension caused from packing people into densely populated corners of the country where there simply may not be enough opportunity for everyone to live life happily ever after. Universal healthcare seems a good option then to help relieve that tension. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #408 March 26, 2012 QuoteQuoteI'm sure one of your whimsical reasons will suffice. Good. As long as you acknowledge that they exist, your ridiculous point falls flat. Great, then you acknowledge your arguments are mostly whimsical fantasies with no basis in reality. Fair enough. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #409 March 26, 2012 QuoteQuote?? between HIPPA and the general policy of keeping minors' records under wrap, that's an odd presumption. Really? School suspensions go on the students record within the school board. General truculence and fights would have been documented as well. There is always the option that this was Martin's first unprovoked assault. Personally I find that option less likely. He's only 17 - could be first *recorded* unprovoked assault. But looping back - you referred to anger management issues. This would be determined by a shrink, not a school official, and it would be priveledged information. Information on any criminal acts would also be difficult to see- these records are supposed to be sealed, the child's name not publicly released. And then you have FERPA controlling what records the school might release. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,489 #410 March 26, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteI'm sure one of your whimsical reasons will suffice. Good. As long as you acknowledge that they exist, your ridiculous point falls flat. Great, then you acknowledge your arguments are mostly whimsical fantasies with no basis in reality. Fair enough. Not at all. If you think my reasons suffice then they must be based in reality. But seriously - to demonstrate how ridiculous your attempted point was, can you honestly think of no way in which an unarmed person can be threatened by another person who does not have a gun? Seriously, think about it. It should take you about 5 seconds, even at your speed. (And if you can't think of any, please let us know, so I can point and laugh.)Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #411 March 26, 2012 QuoteQuoteProximity comes into play, as you well know. Someone 50 yards behind you isn't an immediate threat - someone 5 yards behind you *could* be. And what is being said comes into play. Only in proximity. Someone 50 yards behind you isn't an immediate threat regardless of what they're saying.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #412 March 26, 2012 Quote But looping back - you referred to anger management issues. This would be determined by a shrink, not a school official, For an official diagnoses. Absolutely. Not really what I was talking about. The records that I was talking about are so privilidged and hermetically sealed that for instance nobody would know he was serving a 5 day suspension for en empty baggie. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #413 March 26, 2012 Quote Quote But looping back - you referred to anger management issues. This would be determined by a shrink, not a school official, For an official diagnoses. Absolutely. Not really what I was talking about. The records that I was talking about are so privilidged and hermetically sealed that for instance nobody would know he was serving a 5 day suspension for en empty baggie. And if it were not an official diagnosis related to an actual violent act, they couldn't release it without his permission. The suspension was for a violation of the drug policy. Some people might consider that a relevant detail (though I find it tenuous). Calling it an empty baggie seems as misleading as Gravitymaster's obsession with Jorges. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,991 #414 March 26, 2012 >Someone 50 yards behind you isn't an immediate threat regardless of what they're saying. Nor is an unarmed teen walking away from your car. If that's the criterion they are both guilty of assault. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DougH 270 #415 March 26, 2012 What about a unarmed teen sitting on your chest bashing your head into the pavement? Still not an immediate threat?"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall" =P Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #416 March 26, 2012 Quote>Someone 50 yards behind you isn't an immediate threat regardless of what they're saying. Nor is an unarmed teen walking away from your car. If that's the criterion they are both guilty of assault. Had Zimmerman initiated the physical altercation, you might have a point. As it is...sorry.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #417 March 26, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteI'm sure one of your whimsical reasons will suffice. Good. As long as you acknowledge that they exist, your ridiculous point falls flat. Great, then you acknowledge your arguments are mostly whimsical fantasies with no basis in reality. Fair enough. Not at all. If you think my reasons suffice then they must be based in reality. But seriously - to demonstrate how ridiculous your attempted point was, can you honestly think of no way in which an unarmed person can be threatened by another person who does not have a gun? Seriously, think about it. It should take you about 5 seconds, even at your speed. (And if you can't think of any, please let us know, so I can point and laugh.) Your whimsical fantasies are entertaining enough. Have you though of writing a book? We could call it "Jakee's Bedtime Stories and Other Whimsical Fairy Tales". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #418 March 26, 2012 QuoteCalling it an empty baggie seems as misleading Didn't mean to be misleading, but the empty baggie was the reported violation of the drug policy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,991 #419 March 26, 2012 >What about a unarmed teen sitting on your chest bashing your head into the >pavement? Still not an immediate threat? Not if you initiated the confrontation. If you do that, then you are responsible for the results. Example. You are walking along the street and a guy walks up to you. He tells you "time to die, motherfucker. Turn around." and he goes for his gun. You have a chance to take him down before he gets his gun out. Do you take it? Or do you turn around? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wlsc 0 #420 March 26, 2012 Quote Quote Quote But looping back - you referred to anger management issues. This would be determined by a shrink, not a school official, For an official diagnoses. Absolutely. Not really what I was talking about. The records that I was talking about are so privilidged and hermetically sealed that for instance nobody would know he was serving a 5 day suspension for en empty baggie. And if it were not an official diagnosis related to an actual violent act, they couldn't release it without his permission. The suspension was for a violation of the drug policy. Some people might consider that a relevant detail (though I find it tenuous). Calling it an empty baggie seems as misleading as Gravitymaster's obsession with Jorges. Add another black victim to the Drug War. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,489 #421 March 26, 2012 QuoteQuote>Someone 50 yards behind you isn't an immediate threat regardless of what they're saying. Nor is an unarmed teen walking away from your car. If that's the criterion they are both guilty of assault. Had Zimmerman initiated the physical altercation, you might have a point. As it is... As it is... what? What eyewitness reports state that Martin attacked Zimmerman? Second time of asking.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,489 #422 March 26, 2012 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote I'm sure one of your whimsical reasons will suffice. Good. As long as you acknowledge that they exist, your ridiculous point falls flat. Great, then you acknowledge your arguments are mostly whimsical fantasies with no basis in reality. Fair enough. Not at all. If you think my reasons suffice then they must be based in reality. But seriously - to demonstrate how ridiculous your attempted point was, can you honestly think of no way in which an unarmed person can be threatened by another person who does not have a gun? Seriously, think about it. It should take you about 5 seconds, even at your speed. (And if you can't think of any, please let us know, so I can point and laugh.) Your whimsical fantasies are entertaining enough. Before you get too invested in this, you do realise that I didn't actually state any of the many reasons, right? So, all these whimsical theories are entirely of your own imagining. You do get that, right? And if you are in fact stating that you cannot think of any way in which an unarmed (or thought to be) man can threaten another unarmed man... Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #423 March 26, 2012 QuoteWhat eyewitness reports state that Martin attacked Zimmerman? Second time of asking. The one in post 256. You made a response to post 255 15 minutes later, so I'm pretty sure you saw it. You also responded to post 270 by devildog which re-iterated it and linked to the eyewitness report.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jclalor 12 #424 March 26, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteWhat eyewitness reports state that Martin attacked Zimmerman? Second time of asking. The one in post 256. You made a response to post 255 15 minutes later, so I'm pretty sure you saw it. You also responded to post 270 by devildog which re-iterated it and linked to the eyewitness report. What do you say about these two. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cWwUAbbWnk&feature=related Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #425 March 26, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteWhat eyewitness reports state that Martin attacked Zimmerman? Second time of asking. The one in post 256. You made a response to post 255 15 minutes later, so I'm pretty sure you saw it. You also responded to post 270 by devildog which re-iterated it and linked to the eyewitness report. What do you say about these two. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cWwUAbbWnk&feature=related Can't access youtube from here.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
