RE: Michael Dunn convicted of murder, so much for him being let off

RE: Michael Dunn convicted of murder, so much for him being let off (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Musicmystery -> RE: Michael Dunn convicted of murder, so much for him being let off (10/3/2014 8:49:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: stef quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Have you ever posted anything not revolving around your obsession with guns? Just wondering. I think the answer is no. http://www.collarchat.com/m_4738063/mpage_1/key_/tm.htm#4738063 Does this mean you disapprove of the conviction, since I am, according to you, obsessively pro gun, I must be wrong. Or do you admit that since I said from the beginning that he was clearly guilty that I am not blindly in favor of the guy with the gun? Does this mean you truly have no concept of logic in language whatsoever? What a non sequitur. And a delusion.

stef -> RE: Michael Dunn convicted of murder, so much for him being let off (10/3/2014 9:10:08 PM)
Elvis has definitely left the building.

joether -> RE: Michael Dunn convicted of murder, so much for him being let off (10/4/2014 6:25:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: joether I had thought to create a thread on this info of Mr. Dunn. Got side tracked on life. It happens... I guess many people were of the belief this guy would get away with murder using 'Stand Your Ground' (SYG) as a defense (since its such a flimsy law to begin with in reality). Frankly, the guy was an asshole with a gun. Would he have been as belligerent towards the teens had he not have had a gun? Probably not. That the gun, like a bit to much of 'liquid courage' (i.e. alcohol), sometimes makes people behave in ways they would not have given the same situation. This guy lost control of his temper and allowed 'blind rage' to do the 'talking'. Hopefully this serves as a reminder that having a gun involves a higher degree of responsibility with it. And that SYG laws have their limits. First off SYG never applied. It wasn't even relevant except in the minds of people who believe that people like Dunn are the result of it. They aren't, they existed before SYG and will continue to exist even if the anti self defense people get their way and get they get them repealed. Nobody defended Dunn. He should have been convicted the first time. He didn't get off, he was convicted on retrial in spite of assurance by anti self defense people that nobody gets convicted after a hung jury. That was a SYG case from the beginning. That if you feel threaten; whether in reality or not, that you could whip out the firearm and blow whoever was down range away without penalty. Yeah, the law has gotten a lot of bad press, and rightly so! Its for people that have a chip on their shoulders and an axe to grind against anyone that doesn't agree with them. This is made worst with that person with a firearm. The law was put into place to appease the gun culture of the state. Its been a bad law, that creates many bad problems with firearms involved. Its an excuse not to be responsible with a firearm. And all of us on this forum debated the issue in February of this year. Including you! If SYG was not an issue, why did it come up heavily in those threads as it involved Mr. Dunn? Actually there were many people defending Mr. Dunn and his actions. Like, Cory Strolla. Know who he is? Defense attorney? That sort of shows your argument of 'no one defended him' is full of shit. An most of us 'anti defense' types that you slam, wanted him convicted (the colorful language you come up with while behaving like a child with a firearm....). Why? So it would discourage others from being irresponsible with firearms. It would encourage people to deal with confrontations like adults rather than whipping out firearms and blasting away. Your going to tell me that firearm owners in the same situation as Mr. Dunn couldn't have walked up to the kid, expressed the music is really loud and ask if it could be turned down? Whether an adult has a firearm or not, I do think they could reasonably ask politely for the music to be turned down, and get a reasonable response followed by the music being turned down. If the kid persisted or ignored the request; just call the police and complain. Not many kids screw around when a police officer is telling them to do something. But Mr. Dunn? He took the law into his own hands!

joether -> RE: Michael Dunn convicted of murder, so much for him being let off (10/4/2014 6:41:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: stef While I am indeed pleased with the verdict, I'm curious just who exactly it is you're referring to when you say "you guys". Anyone who was whining that he "got off" because of syg. Anyone who has since stated that we "gun nuts" are glad that you can get away with shooting people for playing their music to loud. As third wheel points out nobody said he was innocent. If the above description doesn't apply to you then then the term doesn't. No one is contesting he was innocent of what he did. What is being contested is...HOW...he went about doing what he did. That someone without a firearm in the same situation could have ignored the whole thing. Or even walk up to the kid and politely ask for the music to be turned down. Or even, just contact the police and have them deal with the problem (they do get paid for that sort of stuff). But Mr. Dunn, is the 'representation' of the gun culture here. That if you have a gun you can take the law into your own hands and 'do something about it'. He confronted those kids, got angry, became a belligerent asshole, and in a fit of blind rage, pulled the gun and unloaded not one or two rounds, but TEN! Having a firearm is a serious responsibility not to miss use it. But this is only half of the equation here. The other half was whether this was a 'Stand Your Ground' issue. That the law is so vaguely written and easy to be abuse, that most Americans got informed when this situation came onto the national news. This guy said he felt threaten. No, this guy had a major attitude problem and wouldn't have been so, had he not had a firearm on his person. He also made the racist viewpoint that since they are black and teenagers, they must be armed, hence, SYG. The SYG law is just terrible; it was put into place of political points by the GOP. It allows people to be less responsible of the situations they get into when firearms are concern. I just do not see how this law, helps those arguing for less gun control.

BamaD -> RE: Michael Dunn convicted of murder, so much for him being let off (10/4/2014 8:41:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: joether I had thought to create a thread on this info of Mr. Dunn. Got side tracked on life. It happens... I guess many people were of the belief this guy would get away with murder using 'Stand Your Ground' (SYG) as a defense (since its such a flimsy law to begin with in reality). Frankly, the guy was an asshole with a gun. Would he have been as belligerent towards the teens had he not have had a gun? Probably not. That the gun, like a bit to much of 'liquid courage' (i.e. alcohol), sometimes makes people behave in ways they would not have given the same situation. This guy lost control of his temper and allowed 'blind rage' to do the 'talking'. Hopefully this serves as a reminder that having a gun involves a higher degree of responsibility with it. And that SYG laws have their limits. First off SYG never applied. It wasn't even relevant except in the minds of people who believe that people like Dunn are the result of it. They aren't, they existed before SYG and will continue to exist even if the anti self defense people get their way and get they get them repealed. Nobody defended Dunn. He should have been convicted the first time. He didn't get off, he was convicted on retrial in spite of assurance by anti self defense people that nobody gets convicted after a hung jury. That was a SYG case from the beginning. That if you feel threaten; whether in reality or not, that you could whip out the firearm and blow whoever was down range away without penalty. Yeah, the law has gotten a lot of bad press, and rightly so! Its for people that have a chip on their shoulders and an axe to grind against anyone that doesn't agree with them. This is made worst with that person with a firearm. The law was put into place to appease the gun culture of the state. Its been a bad law, that creates many bad problems with firearms involved. Its an excuse not to be responsible with a firearm. And all of us on this forum debated the issue in February of this year. Including you! If SYG was not an issue, why did it come up heavily in those threads as it involved Mr. Dunn? Actually there were many people defending Mr. Dunn and his actions. Like, Cory Strolla. Know who he is? Defense attorney? That sort of shows your argument of 'no one defended him' is full of shit. An most of us 'anti defense' types that you slam, wanted him convicted (the colorful language you come up with while behaving like a child with a firearm....). Why? So it would discourage others from being irresponsible with firearms. It would encourage people to deal with confrontations like adults rather than whipping out firearms and blasting away. Your going to tell me that firearm owners in the same situation as Mr. Dunn couldn't have walked up to the kid, expressed the music is really loud and ask if it could be turned down? Whether an adult has a firearm or not, I do think they could reasonably ask politely for the music to be turned down, and get a reasonable response followed by the music being turned down. If the kid persisted or ignored the request; just call the police and complain. Not many kids screw around when a police officer is telling them to do something. But Mr. Dunn? He took the law into his own hands! All of the pro gun people wanted him convicted to so you have no moral high ground here. There was no excuse for his actions. I am still at a loss for how anyone could have voted not guilty in the original case.

BamaD -> RE: Michael Dunn convicted of murder, so much for him being let off (10/4/2014 8:46:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: stef While I am indeed pleased with the verdict, I'm curious just who exactly it is you're referring to when you say "you guys". Anyone who was whining that he "got off" because of syg. Anyone who has since stated that we "gun nuts" are glad that you can get away with shooting people for playing their music to loud. As third wheel points out nobody said he was innocent. If the above description doesn't apply to you then then the term doesn't. No one is contesting he was innocent of what he did. What is being contested is...HOW...he went about doing what he did. That someone without a firearm in the same situation could have ignored the whole thing. Or even walk up to the kid and politely ask for the music to be turned down. Or even, just contact the police and have them deal with the problem (they do get paid for that sort of stuff). But Mr. Dunn, is the 'representation' of the gun culture here. That if you have a gun you can take the law into your own hands and 'do something about it'. He confronted those kids, got angry, became a belligerent asshole, and in a fit of blind rage, pulled the gun and unloaded not one or two rounds, but TEN! Having a firearm is a serious responsibility not to miss use it. But this is only half of the equation here. The other half was whether this was a 'Stand Your Ground' issue. That the law is so vaguely written and easy to be abuse, that most Americans got informed when this situation came onto the national news. This guy said he felt threaten. No, this guy had a major attitude problem and wouldn't have been so, had he not had a firearm on his person. He also made the racist viewpoint that since they are black and teenagers, they must be armed, hence, SYG. The SYG law is just terrible; it was put into place of political points by the GOP. It allows people to be less responsible of the situations they get into when firearms are concern. I just do not see how this law, helps those arguing for less gun control. Stand your ground and castle doctrine were written to stop cases like the Pinkerton/Green case in MD were Pinkerton was so clearly just defending himself that he got a directed verdict. The prosecutor charged him, literally, because he had a gun and didn't allow Green to beat him till the police arrived. If you don't want to accept my word for it check the excuses the prosecutor used for charging him.

ThirdWheelWanted -> RE: Michael Dunn convicted of murder, so much for him being let off (10/4/2014 11:15:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD All of the pro gun people wanted him convicted to so you have no moral high ground here. There was no excuse for his actions. I am still at a loss for how anyone could have voted not guilty in the original case. The only reason I can see is that 1st degree murder still seems like a stretch. Murder by definition requires premeditation and malice aforethought. Since even Joether has said that Dunne "got angry, became a belligerent asshole, and in a fit of blind rage, pulled the gun and unloaded not one or two rounds, but TEN!" As far as I'm aware, that's manslaughter, not murder. I think Dunne deserves to be in prison, I just don't think that 1st degree murder made much sense. As I said earlier, clearly the jury didn't agree, I just hope Dunne doesn't win an appeal because of DA over-reach.

DaddySatyr -> RE: Michael Dunn convicted of murder, so much for him being let off (10/5/2014 12:32:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThirdWheelWanted As I said earlier, clearly the jury didn't agree, I just hope Dunne doesn't win an appeal because of DA over-reach. I strongly doubt that would happen. DAs over-reach, all the time. It's part of the "get-them-to-confess-to-something-less (that they also aren't guilty of)-so-I-raise-my-conviction-rate" game. Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) *still* RULE! Ya feel me?

joether -> RE: Michael Dunn convicted of murder, so much for him being let off (10/5/2014 2:17:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD All of the pro gun people wanted him convicted to so you have no moral high ground here. I wanted him convicted because, based on the evidence known, he clearly broke the law! He killed one teenager and three others for what? Playing the music to loud? Is that a criminal offense? Was he not mature to handle the situation like an adult? Ask the music to be turned down in a calm, friendly, non-hostile manner? Or even just call the police and make a complaint? No, he was not able to handle any of these things. Because that is how a responsible adult would have handled them. This idiot, packing his firearm, decided to take the law into his own hands. He got in over his head, lost his cool, and whipped out the gun and began firing. The moral high ground here? Why do you view this like a football game? That one side has to win and the other side has to loose? We both agree the guy used his firearm incorrectly and illegally and now will pay the penalty for his actions. The problem is there is a law that is silly and stupid. It was created and enacted for political points, and the effects be damn! It allowed for people to be less responsible with a very deadly and efficient tool. If your trying to show 'good faith' to those that dislike firearms in the hands of non-LEO's, THIS, was not the way to do it.

joether -> RE: Michael Dunn convicted of murder, so much for him being let off (10/5/2014 2:19:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: ThirdWheelWanted quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD All of the pro gun people wanted him convicted to so you have no moral high ground here. There was no excuse for his actions. I am still at a loss for how anyone could have voted not guilty in the original case. The only reason I can see is that 1st degree murder still seems like a stretch. Murder by definition requires premeditation and malice aforethought. Since even Joether has said that Dunne "got angry, became a belligerent asshole, and in a fit of blind rage, pulled the gun and unloaded not one or two rounds, but TEN!" As far as I'm aware, that's manslaughter, not murder. I think Dunne deserves to be in prison, I just don't think that 1st degree murder made much sense. As I said earlier, clearly the jury didn't agree, I just hope Dunne doesn't win an appeal because of DA over-reach. Yes to clarify, I would love it to be 1st degree. But in reality, its 2nd degree or manslaughter. UNLESS....Mr. Dunn specifically made a scene, knowing his firearm would 'bail' him out of trouble. Then that would be murder in the first.

thompsonx -> RE: Michael Dunn convicted of murder, so much for him being let off (10/5/2014 5:37:44 AM)
ORIGINAL: BamaD A I am not obsessed with guns He says as he stamps his foot and sticks out his tongue. B I have covered other subjects I have gone back and counted...your gun threads outnumber all others by a factor of >100:1. So while it is true on the whole it is not the whole truth, which is quite common with you. C Music knows I have him on hide so attacking me when he knows that unless someone like you responds to his post is lacking in spinal attributes. You hide from criticism and claim those you are hiding from are spineless.[8\|]Aren't you the pussy boy who cant leave the house to get a bottle of milk without two guns,body armor and a rottwieler?

BamaD -> RE: Michael Dunn convicted of murder, so much for him being let off (10/5/2014 7:31:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: ThirdWheelWanted quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD All of the pro gun people wanted him convicted to so you have no moral high ground here. There was no excuse for his actions. I am still at a loss for how anyone could have voted not guilty in the original case. The only reason I can see is that 1st degree murder still seems like a stretch. Murder by definition requires premeditation and malice aforethought. Since even Joether has said that Dunne "got angry, became a belligerent asshole, and in a fit of blind rage, pulled the gun and unloaded not one or two rounds, but TEN!" As far as I'm aware, that's manslaughter, not murder. I think Dunne deserves to be in prison, I just don't think that 1st degree murder made much sense. As I said earlier, clearly the jury didn't agree, I just hope Dunne doesn't win an appeal because of DA over-reach. Yes to clarify, I would love it to be 1st degree. But in reality, its 2nd degree or manslaughter. UNLESS....Mr. Dunn specifically made a scene, knowing his firearm would 'bail' him out of trouble. Then that would be murder in the first. I understood that he was convicted of 1st so you should be delighted. And you can pretend that all us gun owners share the blame.

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125