State's Rights

From Darla, the great debater of this issue...

It's weird how it's mostly white males who cry about state's rights, and who also tend to join the Libertarian party, the party that loves sausage - but not browned. Why they can't attract women is...
Click to expand...

Wow... racist and sexist in the same opening...

Anyway, obviously this thread has been dumbed down by a couple of people who can't defend their ideology so have chosen to go full retard.

The bottom line is - state's rights advocates, including Libertarians, simply do not attract minority votes. There's a reason for that.

And thankfully, their ideology has been rejected by enough people that in the year 2012, while sadly a black male can still be lynched, the local authorities cannot let his murderer go free without federal intervention.
Click to expand...

Again, Darla showing us her intellectual responses above. Pretending that no one can defend Libertarian views, that Libertarian views if accepted by enough people would lead to lynchings of blacks. Yeah... so high horse.

I appreciate everyone trying to make Sf see that he's being a dick, but trust me he wants to be a dick.
Click to expand...

yeah... so above the fray.

If so, must be going through menopause!
Click to expand...

You are just very sensitive. I mean, it sounded like you were weeping during parts of this thread.
Click to expand...

I took out the first two paragraphs of meandering crap, though I do believe they show you are taking this personally.
Click to expand...

Amazing how many times Darla can project emotion onto anonymous internet posters. One of these days she will realize we are laughing at her insane warped views.

Of course your whitewashed version ignores the fact that the state didn't do shit about anything, nor did anyone high up in the state, including the governor, peep a word about this until there was a massive outcry. Five minutes, or excuse me, more correctly and quite literally, five hours after the Feds announced they were opening an investigation into whether his civil rights were violated, the state said they were also convening a grand jury.

Pretending wide-eyed innocence that all of this was going to happen anyway, and of course he would be arrested is total horseshit and I think you know it.
Click to expand...

Of course the massive straw man above was refuted. Yet Darla still refuses to address the timeline she wants to see for States to involve themselves in cases. She still refuses to clarify what it is I am whitewashing. She still refuses to clarify where she is getting her information on when the state knew about this case and where she is getting that they refused to do anything. Keeping in mind of course the murder occurred 25 days ago.

I disagree that I have done any of these things. I believe I have laid out strong arguments. You and SF have shouted, cursed, yelled, meandered, and called me an idiot and a moron over and over. You have not done all of those things, just most of them. Sf has done all of them.
Click to expand...

One of us has indeed laid out a strong argument... it just wasn't Darla. But again, Darla projects emotion onto others as a way to escape actually answering any of the refutations to her beloved straw man... proclaiming, we have shouted, yelled etc... fucking hilarious (oops, I guess I do curse)

Libertarians are diverse and just because you, and individual libertarian are not for one thing, does not mean that I am an idiot. You are offensive, over emotional, nasty, and bullying.
Click to expand...

LMAO... funny how she proclaims Libertarians are diverse, yet at the same time lumps Libertarians into one group that doesn't ever want Fed involvement.

The above are just some of the examples on this thread... I seem to recall someone being called a tittybaby or something like that too... but that couldn't have been Darla... she is on a high horse.
 
cawacko said:
Does everyone who kills someone in self-defense need to go to prison that night? I don't mean just this case I mean everyone. Because based on what I read from what Zimmerman and the witnesses said I can understand why the cops might think it was self-defense on the night the shooting occurred. Now that the 911 calls have been released and more info has come out this guy clearly belongs behind bars.
Click to expand...

No. But do try to get a liberal to explain what timeline they think should be followed. They (mainly Darla) pretend the State refused to do anything immediately (yet fail to back up that claim).

In the case of Zimmerman, he should have been tossed in jail that night (or at the very latest the next day). There is nothing I can see to justify self defense. Unless Martin was some sort of Ninja assassin with a teleportation device which he then used to get Zimmerman out of his car and then started going ninja on him. Something tells me Martin was not a Ninja assassin with a teleportation device.
 
Superfreak said:
No. But do try to get a liberal to explain what timeline they think should be followed. They (mainly Darla) pretend the State refused to do anything immediately (yet fail to back up that claim).

In the case of Zimmerman, he should have been tossed in jail that night (or at the very latest the next day). There is nothing I can see to justify self defense. Unless Martin was some sort of Ninja assassin with a teleportation device which he then used to get Zimmerman out of his car and then started going ninja on him. Something tells me Martin was not a Ninja assassin with a teleportation device.
Click to expand...

How about the next day, after the review of the 911 calls, or the next day after that when they had interviewed the neighbors, or the next day after that when they got his cell phone and talked to the girlfriend, or the next day after they realized this guy had made multiple calls to 911 on any black male near his gated community, but no, it took pressure from the public to get justice for this kid.
 
Jarod said:
WE have a law here in Florida, signed by Jeb Bush, that allows you to shoot and kill anyone who you feel threatened by, so, if this guy says he felt threatened.....
Click to expand...

Jarod, I posted the fucking law. As a lawyer, I expected a less retared answer/post from you. Thanks for lowerng my already rock bottom expectations of you.
 
Rana said:
How about the next day, after the review of the 911 calls, or the next day after that when they had interviewed the neighbors, or the next day after that when they got his cell phone and talked to the girlfriend, or the next day after they realized this guy had made multiple calls to 911 on any black male near his gated community, but no, it took pressure from the public to get justice for this kid.
Click to expand...

Personally I think they had enough that night. But yes, the public did its job and screamed for justice until the state and fed started paying attention.
 
Onceler said:
A case like this illustrates the flaws in the law. What constitutes "attack"? Can you use deadly force against someone who hits you with a fist?

If none of this was caught on tape, he'd be off, scot-free. It basically seems like people can carry guns around, shoot anyone they want and then make up any story they want to justify "self-defense."
Click to expand...

Derp Derp said:
Looks like a pretty irresponsible bit of legislation to me.
Click to expand...

Derp Derp said:
To top that off it was an attempt to fix something that wasn't broke to satisfy a bunch of gun nuts. Remind me to stay out of Florida!
Click to expand...

Could any of you idiots actually cite a flaw in the legislation? Its posted here.
 
I read this article this morning where they interviewed a civil right's attorney who said the state sending it to a grand jury is "textbook" when they want to bury something. The grand jury is closed, so then they say oh it wasn't us who didn't want to press charges, it was the community. So that was interesting and I think what's going to be very interesting is if charges aren't brought. Because that's when this law is going to go on trial, in a way.

I think that white male libertarians are incapable of seeing that law through the eyes of someone who isn't a white male. To pretend that our justice system is color-blind is flat out retarded. This law is known among the black community as the "shoot a n*gger and walk" law for a reason.

Screaming and yelling at all the "idiots and morons" who don't see this the way you do is more than anything else paternalistic. It's saying, stfu you stupid woman, stfu you stupid black guy, we know what's best for you. OUR system is the best! Well, this isn't utopia, and no it's not.

The insistence on ignoring the horrific history regarding state's rights and laws like this one is astounding. In the end Mott is right about Libertarians on the internet where they are prevalent and very loud, and libertarians in real life where most people say "huh?" I saw I think 3d claim that a bunch of libertarians here put mott in his place. That was funny. You did no such thing. You guys scream yell and never shut up, and eventually other people just say, yeah, whatever, and walk away. You haven't put anyone in their place.
 
Johnny Rocketfingers said:
Could any of you idiots actually cite a flaw in the legislation? Its posted here.
Click to expand...

The major flaw is stunningly obvious just from reading this case.

A 28 yo 200 pound man stalked and murdered a 140 pound 17yo black youth and no charges were pressed because he "felt" his life was in danger. I mean, what do you need??? Are you guys playing dumb? What is it?
 
Damocles said:
What will Darla say if the Feds also conclude that there isn't enough evidence to arrest the guy?
Click to expand...

I think that if that were to happen that is when this law will really come under the scrutiny it deserves. In fact, in the long run, I think this man not being charged will be the end of this law. But I do believe the feds aren't going to let it come to that. I don't think they can afford to.
 
Onceler said:
I suspect she'll get in touch w/ any African American friends she has in FL, and tell them to move out. Because it will basically be open season.
Click to expand...

Exactly, but that's why the feds won't let that happen. Because African Americans aren't going to move out. But no one is going to take this lying down, and no one should.
 
Darla said:
I read this article this morning where they interviewed a civil right's attorney who said the state sending it to a grand jury is "textbook" when they want to bury something. The grand jury is closed, so then they say oh it wasn't us who didn't want to press charges, it was the community. So that was interesting and I think what's going to be very interesting is if charges aren't brought. Because that's when this law is going to go on trial, in a way.

I think that white male libertarians are incapable of seeing that law through the eyes of someone who isn't a white male. To pretend that our justice system is color-blind is flat out retarded. This law is known among the black community as the "shoot a n*gger and walk" law for a reason.
Click to expand...

and once again Darla the all seeing all knowing proclaims that White men can't possibly see the law through someone else's eyes. Once again Darla creates a straw man. Unless of course she wishes to show us where any of us stated the justice system is color-blind.

We, for now, will not point out to her the discrepancy in FEDERAL drug enforcement with regards to race. We will let that little fantasy bubble of hers (where the federal government is kind and benevolent and looks after minority rights) stay afloat a bit longer.

Screaming and yelling at all the "idiots and morons" who don't see this the way you do is more than anything else paternalistic. It's saying, stfu you stupid woman, stfu you stupid black guy, we know what's best for you. OUR system is the best! Well, this isn't utopia, and no it's not.
Click to expand...

Ah yes, and here we have yet again Darla proclaiming that people are 'screaming and yelling'.... because clearly her computer shouts certain peoples typed words at her. Ah, then she continues by proclaiming that people stating her warped view of Libertarians is moronic must now be racist and sexist for believing she is bat shit crazy on this topic. But I know... Darla is all seeing and all knowing and if she proclaims something to be true, then it must be.

As for her other strawman... again Darla, please show us where someone stated 'our system is best'... we were simply pointing out that you have no fucking clue what 'our system' IS.

But I know, you see magical 'codes' in everything written... which in reality is just 'code' for 'I have no idea what I am talking about so I am just going to accuse you of being racist/sexist/homophobic/bunny killing white men and hope that means I win the argument'.

The insistence on ignoring the horrific history regarding state's rights and laws like this one is astounding. In the end Mott is right about Libertarians on the internet where they are prevalent and very loud, and libertarians in real life where most people say "huh?" I saw I think 3d claim that a bunch of libertarians here put mott in his place. That was funny. You did no such thing. You guys scream yell and never shut up, and eventually other people just say, yeah, whatever, and walk away. You haven't put anyone in their place.
Click to expand...

Ah yes, more attacks from the high horsed Darla. When does it stop Darla? Do you think by screaming and yelling at us that we will eventually say... that Darla... she sure knows Libertarian viewpoints way better than us. Is that what you are expecting Darla? If so, then I am going to disappoint you. No matter how hard you stamp your feet, you are still 100% wrong.
 
Darla seems to have fallen in to the same logic trap that mott, top, and poet have. white men are the boogey men and should be at fault for everything.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
Darla seems to have fallen in to the same logic trap that mott, top, and poet have. white men are the boogey men and should be at fault for everything.
Click to expand...

Not at all, but there is no way you would ever understand what I am saying simply because you do not want to. You have your opinions, I have mine. I don't think yours are going to take the world by storm, but hey, maybe I am wrong.
 
Darla said:
Not at all, but there is no way you would ever understand what I am saying simply because you do not want to. You have your opinions, I have mine. I don't think yours are going to take the world by storm, but hey, maybe I am wrong.
Click to expand...

And now Glenn Beck is weighing in on the controversy...anyone want to wager which side of the discussion he comes down on?

Does Glenn Beck support the child gunned down in the street or the shooter?

Glenn Beck's website, The Blaze, would like you to know that Trayvon Martin, the Florida teenager shot and killed by neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman, might have been an arsonist. Or a kidnapper. Or even a murderer.

In an article attacking MSNBC's Al Sharpton for "exploiting" the "racial controversy" surrounding Martin's death, The Blaze editor Mytheos Holt writes that "we're also learning more about Trayvon Martin. According to reporters he had been suspended from school." Martin's English teacher said that he had been suspended for "tardiness," but Holt says he has "doubts" and listed every single offense that could have resulted in Martin being suspended from school for 10 days -- to include arson, kidnapping, and murder:

Or possibly even of the following, each of which carries a minimum suspension of ten days:

• Aggravated assault

• Aggravated battery against a non-staff member

• Armed robbery

• Arson

• Assault/Threat against M-DCPS employees or persons conducting official business

• Battery or Aggravated battery against M-DCPS employees or persons conducting official business*

• Homicide

• Kidnapping/Abduction

• Making a false report/threat against the school*

• Sexual battery

• Possession, use, sale, or distribution of firearms, explosives, destructive devices, and other weapons.

But whatever the reason, it's a case that you'll probably be hearing more about in the future.
This is a not-too-subtle implication that Martin might have had it coming. After all, he could have been a kidnapping arsonist. Or a murdering armed robber.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
And now Glenn Beck is weighing in on the controversy...anyone want to wager which side of the discussion he comes down on?

Does Glenn Beck support the child gunned down in the street or the shooter?

Glenn Beck's website, The Blaze, would like you to know that Trayvon Martin, the Florida teenager shot and killed by neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman, might have been an arsonist. Or a kidnapper. Or even a murderer.

In an article attacking MSNBC's Al Sharpton for "exploiting" the "racial controversy" surrounding Martin's death, The Blaze editor Mytheos Holt writes that "we're also learning more about Trayvon Martin. According to reporters he had been suspended from school." Martin's English teacher said that he had been suspended for "tardiness," but Holt says he has "doubts" and listed every single offense that could have resulted in Martin being suspended from school for 10 days -- to include arson, kidnapping, and murder:

Or possibly even of the following, each of which carries a minimum suspension of ten days:

• Aggravated assault

• Aggravated battery against a non-staff member

• Armed robbery

• Arson

• Assault/Threat against M-DCPS employees or persons conducting official business

• Battery or Aggravated battery against M-DCPS employees or persons conducting official business*

• Homicide

• Kidnapping/Abduction

• Making a false report/threat against the school*

• Sexual battery

• Possession, use, sale, or distribution of firearms, explosives, destructive devices, and other weapons.

But whatever the reason, it's a case that you'll probably be hearing more about in the future.
This is a not-too-subtle implication that Martin might have had it coming. After all, he could have been a kidnapping arsonist. Or a murdering armed robber.
Click to expand...

Yeah it is very ugly stuff.
 
Darla said:
Not at all, but there is no way you would ever understand what I am saying simply because you do not want to. You have your opinions, I have mine. I don't think yours are going to take the world by storm, but hey, maybe I am wrong.
Click to expand...
but your hyperbolic hysterical ranting that libertarians are for killing all young black males will?
 
Darla said:
Right that's what I said.
Click to expand...
your entire rant on this thread has been that the libertarian platform is to keep the feds out of the state policing business so that middle aged white males can claim self defense when they kill black people. tell us it hasn't been that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top