Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him Page: <<   < prev  11 12 13 14 [15]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 11:03:28 AM   
LafayetteLady


Posts: 7683
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Northern New Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Powergamz1

Never said this case had anything to do with self defense, that's a strawman fallacy.
One more time, SYG is a self defense law and has nothing to do with this case, period. This isn't even an 'SYG 'type' case.


quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady


quote:

ORIGINAL: Powergamz1

Actually, you are lumping all self defense *when your life is in danger* laws, under the heading of SYG.



Actually I'm not. This had NOTHING to do with self defense and everything to do with a law that says you can use deadly force when there is no logical reason for it. Much like SYG, and all the other shit.





Once again, you are unable to read what the defense used as a defense. So yea, it is an SYG law. Get back to me when you learn the statute involved and grasp what it says.

(in reply to Powergamz1)
Profile   Post #: 281
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 11:06:02 AM   
LafayetteLady


Posts: 7683
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Northern New Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Itsthetruth

So if any women in the Middle East was raped and then stoned to death for Adultery,that would be okay with those who support this law?After all,it was the law,so who care's?


This case has nothing to do with rape, but regardless, we are talking about a law in the United States, specifically Texas. Talking about the Middle East is off topic and not germane to the discussion.

(in reply to Itsthetruth)
Profile   Post #: 282
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 11:08:10 AM   
LafayetteLady


Posts: 7683
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Northern New Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: eulero83

I see your point, but that was absent for the jury, in many other country the fact he aimed in the direction of a person with a firearm proves intention to kill. So it can be red herring but I'm sure if the girl was his ex wife leaving with her new boyfriend after she took the tv she considered hers and he never give her back intention would have been proved.


It is the same in the US to anyone who actually understands the law. Here, we have a bunch of people who are unable to interpret what happened and instead are focusing on other issues to try to prove their point. Just because they are saying so doesn't make it what the law is, only what they believe.

(in reply to eulero83)
Profile   Post #: 283
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 11:09:56 AM   
LafayetteLady


Posts: 7683
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Northern New Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Powergamz1

It's proof of deadly force in the US as well. Like the earlier Texas case, this looks more and more like jury nullification.


Gee, except the jury agreed with the law that was used as a defense. So uhh...wrong again.

(in reply to Powergamz1)
Profile   Post #: 284
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 11:14:54 AM   
Brutalessons


Posts: 21
Joined: 7/3/2012
Status: offline
quote:

Tell me again that it isn't a Stand Your Ground type of law. I've just proven you haven't got a clue what the statute in Texas says, so who's making things up?


"In the United States of America, stand-your-ground law states that a person may justifiably use force in self-defense when there is reasonable belief of an unlawful threat, without an obligation to retreat first. The concept sometimes exists in statutory law and sometimes through common law precedents. One key distinction is whether the concept only applies to defending a home or vehicle, or whether it applies to all lawfully occupied locations."

The title of the statute should explain to you it is not a "stand your ground" law as it deals not with self defense but loss of property.

Stand your ground laws are to protect you from the absurd concept that it is better to be raped and murdered, to run and leave your loved ones behind while you wait and pray for the police to save you, not fro cowardice, but because your liberal representatives have devalued the value of your life over that of the criminal. The worst part is that if you live in one of the crime riddled eastern seaboard cities, this would actually make a sick and masochistic sense to you, and there would be a complete mental inability to understand why anyone would not be willing to cower.

Stand your ground is Not vigilante justice, it is Not wild west, it is a protection to you against being prosecuted because you did what you had to do, when it was necessary. I prefer to think of them as "Good Samaritan Laws".

(in reply to LafayetteLady)
Profile   Post #: 285
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 11:27:29 AM   
LafayetteLady


Posts: 7683
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Northern New Jersey
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Brutalessons

quote:

Tell me again that it isn't a Stand Your Ground type of law. I've just proven you haven't got a clue what the statute in Texas says, so who's making things up?


"In the United States of America, stand-your-ground law states that a person may justifiably use force in self-defense when there is reasonable belief of an unlawful threat, without an obligation to retreat first. The concept sometimes exists in statutory law and sometimes through common law precedents. One key distinction is whether the concept only applies to defending a home or vehicle, or whether it applies to all lawfully occupied locations."

The title of the statute should explain to you it is not a "stand your ground" law as it deals not with self defense but loss of property.

Stand your ground laws are to protect you from the absurd concept that it is better to be raped and murdered, to run and leave your loved ones behind while you wait and pray for the police to save you, not fro cowardice, but because your liberal representatives have devalued the value of your life over that of the criminal. The worst part is that if you live in one of the crime riddled eastern seaboard cities, this would actually make a sick and masochistic sense to you, and there would be a complete mental inability to understand why anyone would not be willing to cower.

Stand your ground is Not vigilante justice, it is Not wild west, it is a protection to you against being prosecuted because you did what you had to do, when it was necessary. I prefer to think of them as "Good Samaritan Laws".


Stand Your Ground, Castle Laws, etc. are all there to tell people it's ok to shoot to kill. Vigilante justice. Calling them "Good Samaritan Laws" is saying that you can decide without a court what the punishment needs to be. They most certainly are vigilante justice.



(in reply to Brutalessons)
Profile   Post #: 286
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 12:04:32 PM   
JeffBC


Posts: 5799
Joined: 2/12/2012
From: Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady
Stand Your Ground, Castle Laws, etc. are all there to tell people it's ok to shoot to kill. Vigilante justice. Calling them "Good Samaritan Laws" is saying that you can decide without a court what the punishment needs to be. They most certainly are vigilante justice.

Well, that's not ENTIRELY fair. You may decide what the punishment needs to be within the parameters specified by whatever "good samaritan" law is in play... in this case you may apparently shoot someone dead but there is a caveat. The jury must agree that you "reasonably believe deadly force is imminently necessary". So I guess in this case the jury did conclude that the loss of $150 necessitated the use of deadly force and that other possible remedial actions were inappropriate or unavailable to the guy.

As I said before, we now know the value of a human life in Texas... no more than $150.


_____________________________

I'm a lover of "what is", not because I'm a spiritual person, but because it hurts when I argue with reality. -- Bryon Katie
"You're humbly arrogant" -- sunshinemiss
officially a member of the K Crowd

(in reply to LafayetteLady)
Profile   Post #: 287
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 12:32:53 PM   
lovmuffin


Posts: 3759
Joined: 9/28/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady


quote:

ORIGINAL: Brutalessons

quote:

Tell me again that it isn't a Stand Your Ground type of law. I've just proven you haven't got a clue what the statute in Texas says, so who's making things up?


"In the United States of America, stand-your-ground law states that a person may justifiably use force in self-defense when there is reasonable belief of an unlawful threat, without an obligation to retreat first. The concept sometimes exists in statutory law and sometimes through common law precedents. One key distinction is whether the concept only applies to defending a home or vehicle, or whether it applies to all lawfully occupied locations."

The title of the statute should explain to you it is not a "stand your ground" law as it deals not with self defense but loss of property.

Stand your ground laws are to protect you from the absurd concept that it is better to be raped and murdered, to run and leave your loved ones behind while you wait and pray for the police to save you, not fro cowardice, but because your liberal representatives have devalued the value of your life over that of the criminal. The worst part is that if you live in one of the crime riddled eastern seaboard cities, this would actually make a sick and masochistic sense to you, and there would be a complete mental inability to understand why anyone would not be willing to cower.

Stand your ground is Not vigilante justice, it is Not wild west, it is a protection to you against being prosecuted because you did what you had to do, when it was necessary. I prefer to think of them as "Good Samaritan Laws".


Stand Your Ground, Castle Laws, etc. are all there to tell people it's ok to shoot to kill. Vigilante justice. Calling them "Good Samaritan Laws" is saying that you can decide without a court what the punishment needs to be. They most certainly are vigilante justice.






It's been explained quite a few times now on this thread that SYG applies to self defense and has nothing what so ever to do with the Texas case. A person can call a dog a cow and even keep repeating it over and over but its still a dog.

_____________________________

"Give a man a gun and he can rob a bank. Give a man a bank and he can rob the world." Unknown

"Long hair, short hair—what's the difference once the head's blowed off." - Farmer Yassir

(in reply to LafayetteLady)
Profile   Post #: 288
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 2:39:46 PM   
Powergamz1


Posts: 1927
Joined: 9/3/2011
Status: offline 		So the *defense* used the SYG law ? Really? They claimed that the defendant was in fear for his life?






Please stop trying to pretend that you are a legal expert, it isn't working
quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady





Once again, you are unable to read what the defense used as a defense. So yea, it is an SYG law. Get back to me when you learn the statute involved and grasp what it says.



< Message edited by Powergamz1 -- 6/9/2013 3:01:10 PM >

_____________________________

"DOMA is unconstitutional as a deprivation of the equal liberty of persons that is protected by the Fifth Amendment" Anthony McLeod Kennedy

" About damn time...wooot!!' Me

(in reply to LafayetteLady)
Profile   Post #: 289
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 3:00:48 PM   
Powergamz1


Posts: 1927
Joined: 9/3/2011
Status: offline 		In America, laws are used to prohibit behavior. As any first year law school student would know, this isn't a country where everything is illegal unless permitted by 'The Law'.
You've had this explained to you before, and you've never once come up with a shred of evidence to the contrary... to support the idea that America uses the Chinese system of presumed guilt.

With that as a bedrock foundation of the legal system, one more time: Laws aren't used as defense, laws are used to prosecute... so when you say that the jury agreed with the Texas 'law' on murder, are you now claiming that the jury voted Guilty?

Exceptions to the laws are used a defenses.
They are commonly written as an addendum to the actual law.

For Example: It shall be a crime under this code for anyone to carry on their person, hid from the common view, any firearm.

That's what is known as 'a law'. Then elsewhere in the uniform code book, there will be a reference to 'definitions'... and 'a firearm' will be defined, so that people don't get arrested for the perfectly legal action of carrying a cardboard cutout of a gun, or a 1" bauble that looks like a gun, or a chocolate gun, etc.

In yet another place in the uniform code book will be listed exceptions to 'The Law', such as police officers, and permit holders.

And finally, if applicable there will be a section that gives defenses.



quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady


quote:

ORIGINAL: Powergamz1

It's proof of deadly force in the US as well. Like the earlier Texas case, this looks more and more like jury nullification.


Gee, except the jury agreed with the law that was used as a defense. So uhh...wrong again.



< Message edited by Powergamz1 -- 6/9/2013 3:05:07 PM >

_____________________________

"DOMA is unconstitutional as a deprivation of the equal liberty of persons that is protected by the Fifth Amendment" Anthony McLeod Kennedy

" About damn time...wooot!!' Me

(in reply to LafayetteLady)
Profile   Post #: 290
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 3:04:27 PM   
Powergamz1


Posts: 1927
Joined: 9/3/2011
Status: offline 		Believe what? What I've said about the United States Supreme Court having made definitive rulings about this decades ago?

I've given the cites over, and over, and over, you can keep denying they exist all you want, reality isn't going to change to match your denial.




quote:

ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady


quote:

ORIGINAL: Itsthetruth

The laws there need to change,just like this law in Texas need's to change.I agree with everything you have been saying.




If you read everything in this thread and Powergamz is who you believe, then you really have a problem.

Yes, the law needs to change, but people need to understand what the law being discussed is. Powergamz likes to pretend he knows what he is talking about, but he hasn't read the statute and certainly doesn't understand it.




_____________________________

"DOMA is unconstitutional as a deprivation of the equal liberty of persons that is protected by the Fifth Amendment" Anthony McLeod Kennedy

" About damn time...wooot!!' Me

(in reply to LafayetteLady)
Profile   Post #: 291
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 3:38:13 PM   
Phoenixpower


Posts: 8098
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffBC

quote:

ORIGINAL: kalikshama
The precedent this case sets is dangerous. A woman is NEVER required to have sex with a man if she doesn't want to. Ever.

I disagree. Sure, she's not required to have sex but then she IS required to return the money. If she does not it is, in fact, theft. And it is hardly a surprise that deadly force is authorized in Texas for a theft situation.

I'm not going to make this one about feminism and reproductive rights. She's a crook.


Is she really required to hand back the money???

Now...I haven't read the article itself, but during my years as escort I did well remember the line on the provider homepage:"Note: that any money paid to the adult escorts listed on this website is for their time and companionship only. Whatever else that may occur if and when contact is made is the choice of consenting adults."

So sex was not necessarily part of it (mostly of course, yes, but if not then he still had to pay for my time and companienship only).

< Message edited by Phoenixpower -- 6/9/2013 3:39:45 PM >

_____________________________

RIP 08-09-07

The PAST is history, the FUTURE a mystery, NOW is a gift - that's why it's called the PRESENT

www.butyoudontlooksick.com/navigation/BYDLS-TheSpoonTheory.pdf

(in reply to JeffBC)
Profile   Post #: 292
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/9/2013 7:00:09 PM   
VideoAdminChi


Posts: 3086
Joined: 8/6/2012
Status: offline 		FR,

This thread is locked for review.

(in reply to Phoenixpower)
Profile   Post #: 293
RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and ki... - 6/10/2013 10:08:54 AM   
VideoAdminChi


Posts: 3086
Joined: 8/6/2012
Status: offline 		This thread has reached the maximum amount of personal attacks and will remain closed. Moving forward, please stay on topic and do not make other posters the topic.

(in reply to VideoAdminChi)
Profile   Post #: 294
Page:   <<   < prev  11 12 13 14 [15]
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: A court in TX just exonerated a man who shot and killed a woman who had refused to have sex with him Page: <<   < prev  11 12 13 14 [15]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094