Go Back  HuntingNet.com Forums > Non Hunting > Politics
A Key Zimmerman Witness!! >

A Key Zimmerman Witness!!

Politics Nothing goes with politics quite like crying and complaining, and we're a perfect example of that.

A Key Zimmerman Witness!!

Old 07-09-2013, 05:00 AM
  #101  
Nontypical Buck
 
FlDeerman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: DeFuniak Spr.Florida
Posts: 4,329
Default

Just heard Travon had T8C in his blood(marijuana).Zimmerman said he followed him because he thought he was on drugs.Strange,NBC had it that Travon was returning from Bible class or something similar.So maybe he was just a thug?
FlDeerman is offline  
Old 07-09-2013, 05:29 AM
  #102  
Nontypical Buck
 
Psylocide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 1,035
Default

Originally Posted by FlDeerman View Post
Just heard Travon had T8C in his blood(marijuana).Zimmerman said he followed him because he thought he was on drugs.Strange,NBC had it that Travon was returning from Bible class or something similar.So maybe he was just a thug?
I used to smoke before youth group when I was younger... doesn't mean much to me.

Originally Posted by God...
Everything that lives and moves about will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything.
Psylocide is offline  
Old 07-09-2013, 07:18 AM
  #103  
Super Moderator
Thread Starter
 
CalHunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern California
Posts: 17,493
Default

Originally Posted by Psylocide View Post
I used to smoke before youth group when I was younger... doesn't mean much to me.
Being under the influence of alcohol or any drug in a homicide/murder/manslaughter case generally does mean something to the judge, lawyers and jury. The automatic question asked is would the incident have happened if the person were not under the influence.
CalHunter is offline  
Old 07-09-2013, 07:28 AM
  #104  
Typical Buck
 
Catus Magnus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: NC
Posts: 501
Default

Originally Posted by CalHunter View Post
Being under the influence of alcohol or any drug in a homicide/murder/manslaughter case generally does mean something to the judge, lawyers and jury. The automatic question asked is would the incident have happened if the person were not under the influence.
It is unfortunate if there will be an automatic assumption that use of alcohol/illicit substances, confers guilt or fault. Still, it's fair to be considered.

Just heard Travon had T8C in his blood(marijuana).Zimmerman said he followed him because he thought he was on drugs.Strange,NBC had it that Travon was returning from Bible class or something similar.So maybe he was just a thug?
Or maybe he just indulged at some time in the recent past - perhaps that night - which doesn't neccesarily mean anything. Or it could mean his judgement was a bit hindered. Doesn't justify getting shot (assaulting someone does, though, IMO)
Catus Magnus is offline  
Old 07-09-2013, 07:30 AM
  #105  
Super Moderator
Thread Starter
 
CalHunter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern California
Posts: 17,493
Default

Originally Posted by sachiko View Post
I thought the CPL class was a good one. The suggested rules were an overview of how to handle yourself while armed. Of course there are exceptions to any general rule.

Outside of the regular instructor, we had three guest instructors. One was an assistant prosecutor, one a deputy sheriff, and one was a criminal defense lawyer. They were all, without exception, pro-second amendment and supporting the right of law-abiding citizens to carry.

It was made quite clear that carrying a gun doesn't make you a crime fighter. You may actually know more about the law than a police officer. But a police officer has a very substantial amount of training in being a crime fighter than the average citizen will ever have no matter how much TV you watch.
This is true. In the police officer's case, he/she is generally trying to prevent the assault, survive the encounter and apprehend the criminal which has more of a challenge per se. In the citizen's case, they are usually just trying to prevent an assault and survive the encounter which does not have as many components in its' goal.

If a police officer shoots someone in the line of duty, there will be an investigation. But, unless there are some very unusual circumstances it will start with the presumption that the shooting was justified. But that won't be the case if you shoot someone, even if the circumstances clearly indicate that it was justified.
There are some differences but many things are the same. As an officer, you still get read your rights, have an attorney present, go through an interview and get to sweat the results of the investigation and determination which usually take a few weeks although some take far longer. It's definitely not a walk in the park for the officer as his/her job and freedom are on the line too.

Here's an example of what I'm saying. Last winter, right here in our town, a homeowner shot a guy who broke into the house and killed him. There is no duty to retreat here if you are in your own home. In fact there is no duty to retreat if you are anywhere. And if you shoot someone and it's determined to be justified, there is no civil liability either. Okay, back to the story. The prosecutor "investigated' for three weeks before announcing that they would not bring charges. So the guy had to hire a lawyer, just in case, and sweat for three weeks while the prosecutor "investigated." Our county prosecutor is extremely anti-gun by the way.
That sounds about right and would be pretty much the same for an officer involved shooting also.

None of these debates has changed my mind. Zimmerman and Martin were both stupid. Yes, I agree that the media and assorted race pimps are probably responsible for the fact that Zimmerman is being prosecuted for murder. Still, what if Martin had been armed? What if he had stuck Zimmerman with a knife before he could get to his gun?

Stupid, Stupid, Stupid.
I agree with you on the race pimps opinion. And FWIW, I don't recall ever seeing any of the debates on HNI "change your mind." Shoulda, woulda, coulda applications are always possible with any situation. If either Zimmerman or Martin knew all of this would happen, I doubt that either of them would have made the same choices. But then, both were free to have made different choices and chose not to do so. It will be interesting to see the outcome.
CalHunter is offline  
Old 07-09-2013, 08:07 AM
  #106  
Nontypical Buck
 
Psylocide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 1,035
Default

Originally Posted by CalHunter View Post
Being under the influence of alcohol or any drug in a homicide/murder/manslaughter case generally does mean something to the judge, lawyers and jury. The automatic question asked is would the incident have happened if the person were not under the influence.
I understand that completely, but I don't agree that THC significantly alters your consciousness to the point of doing things that are completely out of character for the user.

THC is not like meth or lsd or pcp... it simply doesn't affect people in that way. Add alcohol to the equation, then I'd buy it.

I still think Zimmerman should be considered not guilty, because there is plenty of doubt surrounding this whole situation.
Psylocide is offline  
Old 07-09-2013, 10:21 AM
  #107  
LBR
Boone & Crockett
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Mississippi USA
Posts: 15,296
Default

I thought the CPL class was a good one. The suggested rules were an overview of how to handle yourself while armed. Of course there are exceptions to any general rule.
"Suggested rules"? Thought they were "the" rules, period. The only standard rule seems to be "call 911 and otherwise don't get involved".

You never answered any of my questions. What if if were your little girls being dragged to a van, and your neighbors decided to "follow the rules"? Just call 911 from a safe distance, but otherwise don't get involved, even if they could feasibly stop your girls from being taken? Not so black and white anymore, is it?

It was made quite clear that carrying a gun doesn't make you a crime fighter.
Who said it does? NOBODY! If you can't argue the actual points and facts, should that not be telling you something? Quit propping up straw men so you have something to knock down.

What is the problem with doing the right thing, regardless if you are armed or not? My brother saved a guy's life a few years ago. The guy was literally being stomped to death by a member of a bike gang. His "offense" was flirting with the biker's girlfriend. My brother didn't fly in and tackle the guy, he used reasoning and diffused the situation. I don't think I ever saved a life, but I have talked people out of violent situations.

You may actually know more about the law than a police officer But a police officer has a very substantial amount of training in being a crime fighter than the average citizen will ever have no matter how much TV you watch.
Lol--and you can attend as many classes as you want, and read as many books as you want, and parrot them all you want--they will never replace real life experience. FYI, my brother is now an LEO. He wasn't at the time he saved the guy's life. Your little jab missed by a mile.

If a police officer shoots someone in the line of duty, there will be an investigation. But, unless there are some very unusual circumstances it will start with the presumption that the shooting was justified. But that won't be the case if you shoot someone, even if the circumstances clearly indicate that it was justified.
You have no idea what you are talking about--it depends on the situation. In some cases the cop will be sued no matter what, in some cases you won't be harrassed for defending yourself. Where I live, I'm confident that jesse jackson and al sharpton would be shown the door in short order. Zimmerman followed the laws, but now is on trial for murder.

Here's an example of what I'm saying. Last winter, right here in our town, a homeowner shot a guy who broke into the house and killed him. There is no duty to retreat here if you are in your own home. In fact there is no duty to retreat if you are anywhere. And if you shoot someone and it's determined to be justified, there is no civil liability either. Okay, back to the story. The prosecutor "investigated' for three weeks before announcing that they would not bring charges. So the guy had to hire a lawyer, just in case, and sweat for three weeks while the prosecutor "investigated." Our county prosecutor is extremely anti-gun by the way.
One instance doesn't prove anything, except it can happen there. That wouldn't happen here.

None of these debates has changed my mind.
To quote Gomer Pile (Jim Nabors), "Surprise surprise surprise!" Even though you can't answer my questions, or even state what we suppossedly "learned" from the Zimmerman case, you made your mind up. You had it made up from the beginning, regardless of the evidence presented. Not very scientific.

Zimmerman and Martin were both stupid.
Your opinion. If Martin had been some sort of serial rapist, murderer, molester, etc. I dare say you'd be applauding him for his bravery.

At any rate, how was he "stupid"? He obeyed the law--even obeyed your instructor--but that was stupid?

Yes, I agree that the media and assorted race pimps are probably responsible for the fact that Zimmerman is being prosecuted for murder.
PROBABLY??????? As I understood it, the police were writing it up as a classic case of self defense until the race baiters got involved.

Still, what if Martin had been armed? What if he had stuck Zimmerman with a knife before he could get to his gun?
What if Zimmerman had followed the rules of the law, done just what the 911 operator told him to do, and even followed the instruction you were given in your CCW class? Oh wait...he did do all those things. And that's stupid?

Guess it's different when it's not your life or your family's life on the line. The people I know would defend your life, your children's lives, your hubby's life--even if we don't know you. Guess we rather be "stupid" than let someone die because of cowardice.

THC is not like meth or lsd or pcp... it simply doesn't affect people in that way.
You base that on opinion. Drugs affect different people in different ways. Even asprin. Drugs that make one person drowsy may make another hyper, and vice-versa. Alchohol makes one person giggly and sleepy, the next wants to fight and run wild--but "technically" it's a depressant. Even different types of alchohol affect people differently.

I'm no expert, but I have a good friend who used to work closely with the DEA (retired). He's seen cases of people acting like they were on meth or LSD, when it was nothing but pot. Then there are people who can do the really hard stuff and act normal. There's no "rules" with the stuff, anymore than any other drug.
LBR is offline  
Old 07-09-2013, 10:25 AM
  #108  
Giant Nontypical
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Ohio
Posts: 7,869
Default

Originally Posted by sachiko;4066140

If a police officer shoots someone in the line of duty, there will be an investigation. But, unless there are some very unusual circumstances it will start with the presumption that the shooting was justified. But that won't be the case if [B
you[/B] shoot someone, even if the circumstances clearly indicate that it was justified.

.
Round here none involved will be allowed to leave the scene until everything they had with them is turned over, including all clothes. They must call someone to bring them a change of clothes. They have to go through a lot before being released and nothing is determined till the investigation by an outside source is completed. If evidence is found of a questionable nature, it isn't good for those involved.

The problem most suffer with is not expecting or preparing to handle the situation after they were forced to shoot. Law enforcement knows what to expect after a discharge, people greatly need to have in place BEFORE the discharge whatever it takes to protect them in the legal system. Most see the end of it when the attacker is stopped, that's far from the end of the attack.

People can't just shoot somebody and believe that's the end of it, there's a lot more after that and people can't be mistaken about in who's hands they are going to be in, a highly inefficient and grossly abusive of powers grip. Get your legal guns in order as well, you mean little to the system, don't expect to be understood unless you have friends in the right places.

Last edited by nodog; 07-09-2013 at 10:34 AM.
nodog is offline  
Old 07-09-2013, 10:47 AM
  #109  
Nontypical Buck
 
Psylocide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 1,035
Default

Originally Posted by LBR View Post
You base that on opinion. Drugs affect different people in different ways. Even asprin. Drugs that make one person drowsy may make another hyper, and vice-versa. Alchohol makes one person giggly and sleepy, the next wants to fight and run wild--but "technically" it's a depressant. Even different types of alchohol affect people differently.

I'm no expert, but I have a good friend who used to work closely with the DEA (retired). He's seen cases of people acting like they were on meth or LSD, when it was nothing but pot. Then there are people who can do the really hard stuff and act normal. There's no "rules" with the stuff, anymore than any other drug.
The only adverse psychological effects that I've ever seen experienced are panic attacks/anxiety in inexperienced users.

I know it affects everyone differently, I'm not nave or stupid, but I will never believe any of that "reefer madness" propaganda that the DEA/US government sold to my parents and grandparents.

When a study is cited that THC use can lead to psychosis, violent behavior or uncontrollable outbursts in users, I will retract my statement, but until then... I'll stick with my first-hand knowledge of it.
Psylocide is offline  
Old 07-09-2013, 11:15 AM
  #110  
LBR
Boone & Crockett
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Mississippi USA
Posts: 15,296
Default

The only adverse psychological effects that I've ever seen experienced are panic attacks/anxiety in inexperienced users.
If you haven't seen it, it doesn't exist??????
LBR is offline  

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.