Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Loud Whispers]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5_velCAmSo
On the one hand, I imagine that is exactly the sound of hell. I'm a bit startled, as I really didn't believe anything could sound like it before, I thought it was more horrifying silent. That's pretty awesome.
And on the other hand, what the hell guys? You're supposed to be representing better ideals for the future world, not summoning Asmodai from the second circle.
American politics are awesome.

[Hanslanda]

My throat and brain hurt. I hate getting sick.

[Frumple]

And on the other hand, what the hell guys? You're supposed to be representing better ideals for the future world, not summoning Asmodai from the second circle.

Acoustics is an amazing thing that does amazing things.

[Loud Whispers]

And on the other hand, what the hell guys? You're supposed to be representing better ideals for the future world, not summoning Asmodai from the second circle.

Acoustics is an amazing thing that does amazing things.

At the top balcony inside St. Pauls, if you whisper into the wall on one end someone on the other end can hear it. You keep thinking "wait is that background noise what they're talking about?" Until someone from inside the walls calls you a wanker.

[Graknorke]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5_velCAmSo

I was tempted to reply to a comment, but I abstained.

I'm currently thinking up the stupidest/sarcasticest comment I can. It'll maybe not be as good as it could, but I think I'll post it now before I forget.

EDIT: Aaaand done. I included the word 'homogay' so basically anyone who it isn't mocking won't take it seriously.

[Knight of Fools]

Folks keep walking into the den as I'm playing a game and saying, "Looks cool", no matter what game or how it actually looks. It's really getting on my nerves.

[TCM]

I know that this will be controversial and all, but this thread is all about people's personal life and opinions right? So....

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

GEORGE ZIMMERMAN: NOT GUITY

[Ross Vernal]

Zimmurderer found not guilty.  No justice.

[Lagslayer]

I was expecting a hung jury.

Didn't expect a "guilty" at any rate because of a near complete lack of evidence either way. Basically came down to hearsay, with support split down the middle.

[Ross Vernal]

This is my last post on the subject (at least in this thread):

There's some solid evidence in the form of Trayvon Martin's corpse. Even disregarding any racial tones, there should be some penalty for chasing someone down and killing them.

[Vector]

He's not even guilty of manslaughter... under Stand Your Ground, right?

But.

[Moghjubar]

He's not even guilty of manslaughter... under Stand Your Ground, right?

But.

She appears to be guilty of handling a firearm while black.
I would also say of handling a firearm while being a woman as well, but I'm pretty sure its the blackness in this case.

[Frumple]

... article given, suspect was apparently given time for attempted murder, not the warning shots. The comments shed some light on it, including

The woman in question retreated to a garage to her car, acquired a weapon, THEN returned to the residence and THEN fired the weapon. It is not self-defense, nor stand-your-ground. It IS attempted murder. She gambled and lost and it cost her 17 additional years.

Actually evidence and photographs have proven she shot pointing at the wall near her ex husband and his two children.

There's almost certainly a problem there, but it's got more (though more =/= entirely, of course) to do with mandatory sentencing than anything else, imo.

That said, warning shots are in fact illegal in many areas in the states, as is pulling your gun as a deterrent. Killing in self defense isn't (sometimes), but putting stray bullets into the air or using a weapon to intimidate (even if it's for self-defense E:Brandishing! That's the word, and I think the keyword for hunting down the legal status of the act.) can be, depending on the situation. Varies from state to state and situation to situation, as always.

Gun laws in the state range from disparate to fucked up, with occasional bits of something approaching sanity sprinkled among them. Not saying which the stuff being discussed falls under

[Bauglir]

If the law encourages you to kill somebody instead of scare them off, something is terribly wrong. And I can't understand how retrieving a weapon disqualifies it as standing ground. The ability to make it to a garage doesn't imply an ability to escape, particularly in an abusive relationship.

[Frumple]

Law's intended to encourage that if you pull, you're damn sure your life is in danger and that pulling a weapon is the only choice you have available to you. From what I remember of the courses and instruction I've had, you only pull a gun if you're absolutely sure your life is in danger, and once you've pulled, you give one warning that, if ignored, is followed by a shot to center of mass. Deadly weapon is to be used if and only if deadly force is required. If you've pulled a gun it is because you're in a situation where killing them is the only option available. You don't wave the gun around, you don't fire warning shots, etc., so forth, so on. You don't pull unless you're intending to kill, period. You can give warning that you're armed and whatnot beforehand, but the gun does not come out until it's going to be used. S'how it was explained to me, anyway, insofar as I can recall (it's been a few years, honestly.).

As always, there's vagrancies based on area and situation, but... yeah. That sort of law isn't intended (isn't to say it doesn't, but still) to encourage you to kill instead of scare off, it's to encourage not pulling unless you need to kill. And, to re-emphasize, the specifics of when you can and cannot legally pull a gun varies by state, sometimes wildly. Shit gets confusing, s'pretty patchwork regarding a lot of things, from what I understand. And yeah, sometimes things are terribly wrong

Re: The latter bit, though, presumably that was covered in the case. If escape wasn't possible, then it may have qualified (presumably, gods know I'm not a lawyer and the legal specifications are what they are). Apparently judge and jury decided otherwise... s'entirely possible they decided wrongly, but barring more information (which the article, at least, didn't provide) I wouldn't say more with any certainty. It does kinda' seem like getting the gun and then going back into the house (as opposed to staying in the garage and waiting for the threat to come to her) would disqualify the SYG stipulation, though.