Board 8 > Black lawmakers introduce Trayvon Martin resolution [dwmf]

(+) Yeah! (+)

So... It isn't law. Why'd you mention lawmaking in the topic title?

--
MMBN style fighting game made by me in the link below!
http://sandbox.yoyogames.com/games/184947-b8bn

8 views from Bulgaria today. Apparently Vlado is telling his friends!

--
SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized - http://img.imgcake.com/smartmuffin/barkleyjpgde.jpg
http://dudewheresmyfreedom.com/

Dad, Who's Mom ****ing?

Darn, Where's My Fries?

Damn, Whose Mouth Farts?

--
http://i.imgur.com/xBFwK.gif

The other irony here is that while stand your ground does NOT apply to Zimmerman, it WOULD have protected Martin.

Zimmerman's claim is that Martin was on top of him and assaulting him. At this point he CANNOT retreat, even if he wants to, so "stand your ground" is completely irrelevant.

Martin; however, if he would have killed Zimmerman, could have used stand your ground as a defense if he was able to convince people that Zimmerman's "pursuit" of him put him in fear of his life.

It's funny that all the Martin defenders blame stand your ground because "OMG THE COPS EVEN SAID THAT WAS WHY THEY DIDNT ARREST HIM" yet these are the same police they blast all day long as corrupt, incompetent, and racist.

--
SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized - http://img.imgcake.com/smartmuffin/barkleyjpgde.jpg
http://dudewheresmyfreedom.com/

I have heard most Martin defenders cite the law as dumb but most blame the guy who shot the kid.

--
Sir Chris
The Cult of Personality.

So Zimmerman was charged with 2nd degree murder. Good call, prosecutors. I'm glad they didn't go for first degree. The way some states/courts handle it really reduces to nothing the difference between the two.

--
Congratulations to SuperNiceDog, Guru Winner, who was smart enough to pick
your 7 time champion, Link.

As I said in Sess' topic, even second degree is a huge reach. I don't see how they can possibly have enough evidence to convict him of this.

--
SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized - http://img.imgcake.com/smartmuffin/barkleyjpgde.jpg
http://dudewheresmyfreedom.com/

Why hasn't the black community used this tragedy to address deeper rooted social problems within their race. Violence, glorified criminality and gangs are synonymous with black culture. How come no one like Al Sharpton or MLK Jr. or the NAACP using this as an opportunity to express concern with the state of African Americans....why is it always some one's fault....why don't they address their own issues and start to change their own culture and move away from connotation of criminals.

--
Yoblazer: http://oi53.tinypic.com/2hd0dh1.jpg
Watch and you'll see... someday I'll be... part of your world!

As I said in Sess' topic, even second degree is a huge reach. I don't see how they can possibly have enough evidence to convict him of this.

There are states where courts have ruled that all the premeditation that is needed for first degree murder is the instant it takes to pull the trigger. I personally find that result patently absurd- why would the legislature put the word "premeditated" in there, if an instant is enough? Such a result essentially makes second degree murder irrelevant in all cases.

I dunno what the status of FL law on premeditation is, but I'm glad the prosecution at least recognizes the difference between first and second degree murder.

--
Congratulations to SuperNiceDog, Guru Winner, who was smart enough to pick
your 7 time champion, Link.

2nd degree murder is appropriate because there was an intent to kill/harm, and no circumstances that would cause a reasonable man to act that way (unless, of course, he wins on self-defense, in which case he is simply acquitted). The intent came up in the heat of the moment, and was not premeditated, so 1st degree is not appropriate.

As far as I can see it, he either gets convicted of 2nd degree murder or gets acquitted- no room for a manslaughter conviction here.

--
Congratulations to SuperNiceDog, Guru Winner, who was smart enough to pick
your 7 time champion, Link.

Unless, of course, the jury simply decides that he's morally not guilty enough to be convicted of 2nd degree murder, but too guilty to be acquitted, and compromises with manslaughter. Juries do do that kind of thing pretty often.

--
Congratulations to SuperNiceDog, Guru Winner, who was smart enough to pick
your 7 time champion, Link.

And if it were the other way around, and Zimmerman had died- you bet Trayvon would have been charged with 1st degree murder.

--
Congratulations to SuperNiceDog, Guru Winner, who was smart enough to pick
your 7 time champion, Link.

From: red sox 777 | #062
And if it were the other way around, and Zimmerman had died- you bet Trayvon would have been charged with 1st degree murder.

No, I don't bet that actually.

Zimmerman should have fled the country last week. No charges were filed so they wouldn't have been able to stop him!

--
SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized - http://img.imgcake.com/smartmuffin/barkleyjpgde.jpg
http://dudewheresmyfreedom.com/

Where would he go though? I don't think he wants to spend the rest of his life in one of the countries that doesn't extradite to the US, and he probably doesn't have the means to do so.

--
Congratulations to SuperNiceDog, Guru Winner, who was smart enough to pick
your 7 time champion, Link.

How it probably goes is Trayvon gets charged with 1st degree murder, then accepts a plea bargain where he pleads guilty to 2nd degree murder or manslaughter with a few years in prison, in order to avoid a 1st degree murder conviction and the death penalty. Poor kid goes to prison for a few years, and because of his record when he gets out is unable to support himself, eventually driving him to crime. Rinse and repeat for a few decades.

This storyline is complicated by the fact that his stepfather was wealthy enough to be living in a gated community. So it's not quite as probable as it would be otherwise, but still a fairly strong possibility.

--
Congratulations to SuperNiceDog, Guru Winner, who was smart enough to pick
your 7 time champion, Link.

Oh right, he was only 17- no death penalty then, but life in prison without parole is still enough of a deterrent to going to trial.

In a way, Zimmerman is lucky the media made such a big deal out of this case. It would be par for the course normally for the prosecution to charge 1st degree murder, and tell the defendant: either you take the plea deal or else you go ahead and risk your life. But not with so much media scrutiny.

--
Congratulations to SuperNiceDog, Guru Winner, who was smart enough to pick
your 7 time champion, Link.

I'm guessing there's gonna be an assload of pressure on Zimmerman to fight the charges and NOT plead out. I certainly hope that's what he does...

--
SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized - http://img.imgcake.com/smartmuffin/barkleyjpgde.jpg
http://dudewheresmyfreedom.com/

Yes, and something he can do when the charge is only 2nd degree murder- and him being a sympathetic defendant too. It's much riskier to fight a 1st degree murder charge that can lead to the death penalty, and even if not, in Florida carries a mandatory sentence of at least life in prison without parole.

--
Congratulations to SuperNiceDog, Guru Winner, who was smart enough to pick
your 7 time champion, Link.

I'm sure you already know this but there's a huge push in the freedom movement to try and convince people to never take a plea-deal under any circumstances and to fight all charges no matter what.

--
SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized - http://img.imgcake.com/smartmuffin/barkleyjpgde.jpg
http://dudewheresmyfreedom.com/

Yeah.....but it's just too personally risky for defendants to actually do it, I think. Especially if they don't have the benefits of an excellent, expensive, attorney and a media frenzy.

--
Congratulations to SuperNiceDog, Guru Winner, who was smart enough to pick
your 7 time champion, Link.

From: red sox 777 | #070
Yeah.....but it's just too personally risky for defendants to actually do it, I think. Especially if they don't have the benefits of an excellent, expensive, attorney and a media frenzy.

Well, much like voting for politicians who will eliminate your job or cut your welfare benefits, sometimes you have to do what's right even if it means less desirable personal circumstances!

--
SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized - http://img.imgcake.com/smartmuffin/barkleyjpgde.jpg
http://dudewheresmyfreedom.com/

Well, much like voting for politicians who will eliminate your job or cut your welfare benefits, sometimes you have to do what's right even if it means less desirable personal circumstances!

If you vote for a politician who will eliminate your welfare benefits, you are very noble and a true patriot.

I think we should expand welfare, however. Get 50% of the country on it. The fact is, as technology improves and trade with other countries increases, we need fewer and fewer people in the USA to work, but they need to be smarter and better educated/trained. People have this idea that everyone should work, but I think it's perhaps outdated.

Let's dream of a capitalist utopia where 1% of people are employed (and getting mega rich) and 99% are on welfare?

--
Congratulations to SuperNiceDog, Guru Winner, who was smart enough to pick
your 7 time champion, Link.

Let's dream of a capitalist utopia where 1% of people are employed (and getting mega rich) and 99% are on welfare?

Sounds a little bit like slavery to me.

--
SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized - http://img.imgcake.com/smartmuffin/barkleyjpgde.jpg
http://dudewheresmyfreedom.com/

Sounds a little bit like slavery to me.

How so? The 99% are receiving welfare, not working. And for the mechanics of it, it would work something like this: prior to enrolling in college, you sign a contract promising to pay a percentage of your income in taxes to support welfare. If you make it into the 1%, you make a lot of money and some of that goes to taxes for the welfare. If not, you collect welfare.

Of course, this proposal would be incredibly hated by the (greedy and self-righteous) middle class, so it could probably unite the politicians in condemning it.

--
Congratulations to SuperNiceDog, Guru Winner, who was smart enough to pick
your 7 time champion, Link.

How so? The 99% are receiving welfare, not working.

Some people being able to live at the expense of other people is literally the definition of slavery. That's the entire point. It's "YOU go pick the cotton while I sit here and get all the benefits of it"

--
SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized - http://img.imgcake.com/smartmuffin/barkleyjpgde.jpg
http://dudewheresmyfreedom.com/

From: red sox 777 | #072
Let's dream of a capitalist utopia where 1% of people are employed (and getting mega rich) and 99% are on welfare?

Communism?

--
_foolmo_
'nice comma splice' - TomNook7

Nope, the difference here is that it's all contractual. The idea is that prior to going to college (100% college enrollment in this system), people have no idea if they will hit the 1% lottery or not (that is, whether they will end up among the few who find a job). So they sign a contract with the state agreeing to pay taxes to support welfare if they win, and they receive welfare if they lose. People could refuse to sign the contract, but that's a huge risk that almost nobody will take, because the odds of finding work are too low.

--
Congratulations to SuperNiceDog, Guru Winner, who was smart enough to pick
your 7 time champion, Link.

And the other difference is that in communism, it's the 99% who are working.

--
Congratulations to SuperNiceDog, Guru Winner, who was smart enough to pick
your 7 time champion, Link.