Teenage Girl Shot And Killed In Texas Because Of Stand Your Ground Law - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Lankist;36719118]It's cool how five minutes ago you were bitching about me being mean. [editline]11th July 2012[/editline] Go back to watching Beyond Thunderdome.[/QUOTE] It'll come to you on your deathbed if not before. Realising it now is neither better nor worse.

[QUOTE=Lankist;36719144]Look who's fucking dodging shit now. Answer: Is adultery immoral? Is adultery illegal? Is lying immoral? Is lying illegal? Is alcoholism immoral? Is alcoholism illegal?[/QUOTE] You first, my friend. It is a simple yes or no, and I'll answer any question you want. Considering I posed my question long ago, I think it's only fair.

[QUOTE=Lankist;36719144]Look who's fucking dodging shit now.[/QUOTE] [quote]So tell me, do I have the right to defend myself from the actions of an initial aggressor?[/quote] Fifth time you've dodged it.

[QUOTE=sdwise;36719156]You first, my friend. It is a simple yes or no, and I'll answer any question you want. Considering I posed my question long ago, I think it's only fair.[/QUOTE] I have no answer to a subjective question and I will not delve further into metaphysical bullshit. I listed the legal circumstances in which you have that right dependent upon state. You think law is based on morality? Fucking answer: Is adultery immoral? Is adultery illegal? Is lying immoral? Is lying illegal? Is alcoholism immoral? Is alcoholism illegal? [editline]11th July 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=_jesterk;36719163]Fifth time you've dodged it.[/QUOTE] I already answered it five times: [quote]Uhh, it isn't fucking arbitrary, it's the goddamn law. [B]Pretty much everybody but fucking Texas realizes misdemeanors don't qualify for self defense.[/B] [B]Nor do they think property damage justifies lethal force.[/quote][/B] [quote]You need to actually know that's a likelihood before you kill a motherfucker. Most states treat self defense cases with extreme scrutiny. Lot of motherfuckers get brought up on charges. Those "burglar sues victim" cases, despite sensationalism, are over the fact that someone permanently injured a motherfucker over a stereo or something. It's not justified under anything but fucking Texas law.[/quote] [quote]You are damn well accountable for your actions when they result in a fatality. Even Texas, with their crazy fucking laws, will investigate the unholy shit out of you if somebody ends up dead at your feet. [/quote]

I guess because of "Stand your ground" she won't be standing any more!

[QUOTE=Lankist;36719166]I have no answer to a subjective question and I will not delve further into metaphysical bullshit. I listed the legal circumstances in which you have that right dependent upon state. You think law is based on morality? Fucking answer: Is adultery immoral? Is adultery illegal? Is lying immoral? Is lying illegal? Is alcoholism immoral? Is alcoholism illegal?[/QUOTE] Government does not create liberties. Also, law is based on philosophy. As I said before, I asked first, I'll be answering last. All observers in this thread see what is happening here. Do I have the right to defend myself against the actions of an initial aggressor? I'll make it easy. Rate me disagree for no, and agree for yes.

[QUOTE=Lankist;36719055]You do that. But don't bitch when you go to prison for killing an unarmed man.[/QUOTE] This is exactly where the Castle doctrine fits in perfectly. I won't go to prison because the courts won't find me guilty because I killed a man who, let's face it, probably would be armed in a hypothetical invasion, because any criminal with a hint of sense would bring something to give them an edge.

[QUOTE=sdwise;36719182]Government does not create liberties. Also, law is based on philosophy. As I said before, I asked first, I'll be answering last. All observers in this thread see what is happening here. Do I have the right to defend myself against the actions of an initial aggressor? I'll make it easy. Rate me disagree for no, and agree for yes.[/QUOTE] Again: [quote]You need to actually know that's a likelihood before you kill a motherfucker. Most states treat self defense cases with extreme scrutiny. Lot of motherfuckers get brought up on charges. Those "burglar sues victim" cases, despite sensationalism, are over the fact that someone permanently injured a motherfucker over a stereo or something. It's not justified under anything but fucking Texas law.[/quote] Stop repeating the same question just because you didn't get an answer you liked.

[QUOTE=Lankist;36719055] You're arguing law right now, and the law is against you. [/QUOTE] No I'm not, I'm arguing with you about what you think is morally justifiable.

Except he was asking what you thought, not to talk about what constitutes a "sane" state or some other metaphysical thing.

[QUOTE=Leo Leonardo;36719186]This is exactly where the Castle doctrine fits in perfectly. I won't go to prison because the courts won't find me guilty because I killed a man who, let's face it, probably would be armed in a hypothetical invasion, because any criminal with a hint of sense would bring something to give them an edge.[/QUOTE] That isn't justice. That's murder. [editline]11th July 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=_jesterk;36719189]Except he was asking what you thought, not to talk about what constitutes a "sane" state or some other metaphysical thing.[/QUOTE] What I think doesn't change the law. "Rights" are defined by the U.S. Constitution and interpreted by the Supreme Court. You do not have the right to kill in anything less than a truly life-or-death situation, and the evidence is expected to indicate that WAS the case. Even then, in the most apt case for self defense, you may face charges if you killed unnecessarily. If you shoot once, incapacitate the assailant, and then shoot them again while they're on the ground, you go to fucking prison. Furthermore, death is not strictly intentional in justifiable cases. It is merely an effect of defense. Intending to kill is [I]not[/I] legally justified, though a death resulting in defensive measure may be.

[QUOTE=Lankist;36719195]That isn't justice. That's murder.[/QUOTE] You're worse than PETA right now.

[QUOTE=Lankist;36719195]That isn't justice. That's murder.[/QUOTE] The guy had it coming when he decided it would be a great time to show up unannounced at my goddamn house. If he doesn't want to risk getting his ass blown off, then he can stay the hell out, unless he presents a good reason why he's there.

[QUOTE=_jesterk;36719212]You're worse than PETA right now.[/QUOTE] I'm the only person here who understands how the goddamn law works. [editline]11th July 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Leo Leonardo;36719220]The guy had it coming when he decided it would be a great time to show up unannounced at my goddamn house[/QUOTE] enjoy prison rape, because the judge is not going to take kindly to that.

[QUOTE=Lankist;36719224]I'm the only person here who understands how the goddamn law works.[/QUOTE] [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FopyRHHlt3M[/media] This is my third media macro in a row. I shouldn't have to use that many.

Please do explain the common criteria for justified self defense, in detail. I'd love to hear you explain it to me.

[QUOTE=Lankist;36719250]Please do explain the common criteria for justified self defense, in detail. I'd love to hear you explain it to me.[/QUOTE] Uh I'm pretty sure most normal people know when to start and when to stop. Are you saying that you're so far gone that you need someone to reacquaint you with reality?

[QUOTE=Lankist;36719144]Look who's fucking dodging shit now. Answer: Is adultery immoral? Is adultery illegal? Is lying immoral? Is lying illegal? Is alcoholism immoral? Is alcoholism illegal?[/QUOTE] Adultery is illegal.

[QUOTE=_jesterk;36719267]Uh I'm pretty sure most normal people know when to start and when to stop. Are you saying that you're so far gone that you need someone to reacquaint you with reality?[/QUOTE] That's not what I asked you. There are two primary legal criteria for an action to qualify as self defense. What are they?

[QUOTE=Lankist;36719224]enjoy prison rape, because the judge is not going to take kindly to that.[/QUOTE] Do explain. I'm not gonna argue with you on much of this, because my knowledge of law isn't really all that extensive, but I do genuinely want to see an explanation.

[QUOTE=Mini Shot;36719272]Adultery is illegal.[/QUOTE] Not in the US it isn't. Grounds for divorce? Yes. But criminal? No.

[QUOTE=Lankist;36719195]That isn't justice. That's murder. [editline]11th July 2012[/editline] What I think doesn't change the law. "Rights" are defined by the U.S. Constitution and interpreted by the Supreme Court. You do not have the right to kill in anything less than a truly life-or-death situation, and the evidence is expected to indicate that WAS the case. Even then, in the most apt case for self defense, you may face charges if you killed unnecessarily. If you shoot once, incapacitate the assailant, and then shoot them again while they're on the ground, you go to fucking prison. Furthermore, death is not strictly intentional in justifiable cases. It is merely an effect of defense. Intending to kill is [I]not[/I] legally justified, though a death resulting in defensive measure may be.[/QUOTE] Ahh. So if the legislature were to amend the constitution and the supreme court rule that we had no right to life, would that be legitimate? Our liberties are part of our humanity, not our government. And, to be clear, you never rated my post. I'm hurt.

[QUOTE=sdwise;36719287]Ahh. So if the legislature were to amend the constitution and the supreme court rule that we had no right to life, would that be legitimate? Our liberties are part of our humanity, not our government.[/QUOTE] Then feel free to go live in a cave. You live in a society. You are ruled by law, not by your whims. You can pretend you're justified all you want. The law disagrees.

[QUOTE=Lankist;36719284]Not in the US it isn't. Grounds for divorce? Yes. But criminal? No.[/QUOTE] I thought in some US states it's illegal?

[QUOTE=Lankist;36719291]Then feel free to go live in a cave. You live in a society. You are ruled by law, not by your whims. You can pretend you're justified all you want. The law disagrees.[/QUOTE] Law is fad. It changes all the time. Liberty is humanity. It is philosophy and respect and love and non-aggression. It is peace. So? Tell me. As a living human being, irrespective of the nation in which I reside: Do I have the right to defend myself against the actions of an initial aggressor?

[QUOTE=Lankist;36719284]Not in the US it isn't. Grounds for divorce? Yes. But criminal? No.[/QUOTE] In Wisconsin it is a Class I felony, in New York it is a Class B misdemeanor, and in Maryland it is a $10 fine. It's still illegal, just rarely prosecuted and the laws vary from state to state.

[QUOTE=ROFLBURGER;36719304]I thought in some US states it's illegal?[/QUOTE] It used to be. Court precedence long overturned that. Cases of adultery can be pursued in civil court as a form of contractual dispute. Nothing more. No criminal charges would ever be filed. [editline]11th July 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Mini Shot;36719314]In Wisconsin it is a Class I felony, in New York it is a Class B misdemeanor, and in Maryland it is a $10 fine. It's still illegal, just rarely prosecuted and the laws vary from state to state.[/QUOTE] No, it's moot. Do I need to explain what moot laws are again? As sdwise attempted to assert by saying sodomy is still "illegal" in Texas. It isn't. It has long been overturned by national court precedence, and the supremacy clause dictates any state-level laws are then null and void. Same goes for unenforced laws. It's at a point where, if they were ever enforced again, they would be quickly stricken down in court. Thus, they are moot.

[QUOTE=Jetblack357;36716226]And you damn sure don't want to go breaking into houses in [B]Texas[/B] of all places, most of the states down in that area, almost every motherfucker has at least one gun if not an entire arsenal.[/QUOTE] I wouldn't even dare try it, they can own anti tank guns down in Texas.

[QUOTE=Lankist;36719316]It used to be. Court precedence long overturned that. Cases of adultery can be pursued in civil court as a form of contractual dispute. Nothing more. No criminal charges would ever be filed. [editline]11th July 2012[/editline] No, it's moot. Do I need to explain what moot laws are again? As sdwise attempted to assert by saying sodomy is still "illegal" in Texas. It isn't. It has long been overturned by national court precedence, and the supremacy clause dictates any state-level laws are then null and void. Same goes for unenforced laws.[/QUOTE] I never said it was illegal, I said the law was on the books. You agreed. Also, a response would be nice. Post #618.

[QUOTE=Leo Leonardo;36719278]Do explain. I'm not gonna argue with you on much of this, because my knowledge of law isn't really all that extensive, but I do genuinely want to see an explanation.[/QUOTE] Since _jesterk seems to have pimped away, the two criteria for self defense are: (1) a reasonable belief that the use of force was necessary to defend himself or another against the immediate use of unlawful force and (2) the use of no more force than was reasonably necessary in the circumstances. Both of these must be proven in court for a charge of murder or manslaughter to be mitigated as self defense. Note #1. "against IMMEDIATE use of unlawful force." The fact that someone is in your house doesn't qualify. It must be demonstrable that you had legitimate reason to think they were going to harm you beyond your own paranoia. On #2, this is the most important in terms of lethal force. If someone is running at you unarmed, you aren't justified in shooting them eight times in the face. Similarly, if they flee the scene, you CANNOT shoot them. If they are incapacitated, you cannot kill them. Your goal should never be to kill them, for that matter, merely to stop them. All of these people saying they would kill? Yeah. Those people would be violating provision #2 and they would be going to prison for intent to kill and not to stop. [editline]11th July 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=sdwise;36719329]Post #618.[/QUOTE] "Law is fad." I'm not acknowledging that. You've no fucking clue what you're talking about and you just don't want to admit you don't understand the law.