or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › killing Trayvon
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

killing Trayvon - Page 132

post #1966 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by oneeightyseven View Post

but you're not trying to exert anything over them, you are attempting to mitigate or cease any infringements upon your liberties. You are righting an injustice, regardless of how small. I do not see that as aggressive, but I do see and acknowledge how it can become aggressive, although the act itself is not. It's all in the application

crackup[1].gif

So someone talking in a library infringes on your liberties? That's a good one. I had no idea one's liberties were dependent on quiet in a library or theatre.

yes, notice how I qualified that statement with 'regardless of how small'? When someone is being disruptive in an environment where silence is necessitated, as in a library or a movie, your ability to study or be entertained is impeded, and therefore your liberty to do so is as well. You enter into into these environments with a prior knowledge of tolerable conduct, and furthermore when entering you are accepting to abide by these rules for a collective or general benefit of all participants. When one person feels they are the objection to this, they are, in essence, infringing upon all other freedoms. This can be through their own ignorance and done so incidentally, or it can be simply their outright intent on disturbance, either way it negatively impacts the surrounding parties. In addressing them, you are then making their detrimental impact on others apparent to them. You don't have to say "hey asshole shut the fuck up" or "hey dickwad turn your phone off", you can rather say, "excuse me, but your conversation is distracting and making the movie experience unenjoyable for others". The former being aggressive, and the latter being amiable, but both seek to rectify and ameliorate an injustice, albeit a very small injustice.

I like how you failed to address anything I had said at all, but rather focus only on a comparison I had previously made to illustrate a point.
post #1967 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by oneeightyseven View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by oneeightyseven View Post

but you're not trying to exert anything over them, you are attempting to mitigate or cease any infringements upon your liberties. You are righting an injustice, regardless of how small. I do not see that as aggressive, but I do see and acknowledge how it can become aggressive, although the act itself is not. It's all in the application

crackup[1].gif

So someone talking in a library infringes on your liberties? That's a good one. I had no idea one's liberties were dependent on quiet in a library or theatre.

yes, notice how I qualified that statement with 'regardless of how small'? When someone is being disruptive in an environment where silence is necessitated, as in a library or a movie, your ability to study or be entertained is impeded, and therefore your liberty to do so is as well. You enter into into these environments with a prior knowledge of tolerable conduct, and furthermore when entering you are accepting to abide by these rules for a collective or general benefit of all participants. When one person feels they are the objection to this, they are, in essence, infringing upon all other freedoms. This can be through their own ignorance and done so incidentally, or it can be simply their outright intent on disturbance, either way it negatively impacts the surrounding parties. In addressing them, you are then making their detrimental impact on others apparent to them. You don't have to say "hey asshole shut the fuck up" or "hey dickwad turn your phone off", you can rather say, "excuse me, but your conversation is distracting and making the movie experience unenjoyable for others". The former being aggressive, and the latter being amiable, but both seek to rectify and ameliorate an injustice, albeit a very small injustice.

I like how you failed to address anything I had said at all, but rather focus only on a comparison I had made previously.

I addressed things quite well. You just did not like the answers you got so continued to create new scenarios. You actually failed to acknowledge I addressed the original questions because you did not like the answers.

And no, talking in a library is not even a small infringement on one's liberties.
Edited by Piobaire - 4/21/12 at 9:25am
post #1968 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

I addressed things quite well. You just did not like the answers you got so continued to create new scenarios. You actually failed to acknowledge I addressed the original questions because you did not like the answers.

but you really did not address what I said. You related it to "attempting to exert power" and I refuted that with you aren't trying to "exert power" rather you are merely attempting to ameliorate a grievance that you have. What was your response to that? Oh yeah...... And yes it is an infringement once it becomes cumbersome on those around that individual. Maybe you should take some courses on Rousseau and Mill.
Edited by oneeightyseven - 4/21/12 at 7:14pm
post #1969 of 6250
I edited that out prior to your post. It was uncalled for.
post #1970 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by oneeightyseven View Post


but you really did not address what I said. You related it to "attempting to exert power" and I refuted that with you aren't trying to "exert power" rather you are merely attempting to ameliorate a grievance that you have. What was your response to that? Oh yeah...... And yes it is an infringement once it becomes cumbersome on those around that individual. Maybe you should take some courses on Rousseau and Mill.

No, you did not refute anything. My opinion is that it is exerting power to control someone talking in a library. Your choices are to ignore it, move along, or attempt to exert power to control that talker's actions. You cannot "refute" my opinion of the situation no matter what university course you just took.
post #1971 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by lasbar View Post

This law is inept and dangerous and anybody with a brain cell could have predicted such situations arising quickly..
It has been voted under populist reasons and is obviously flawed..
If somebody was following me around, I would be at least defensive giving the other guy the excuse to shoot me...
What now will stop a bad hooded black guy following a nice young white guy to mug him and when the latter will try to defend himself , the black guy will use the same law to shoot him...
Without reliable witness , the guy will get away with it..
Zimmerman has been told not to engage the guy or to follow him and was known to be using racist language...
What else the judge needs to arrest and charge him???
This tragic episode leaves the politicians in a conumdrum because it will create a dangerous precedent if Zimmerman is not jailed..
How can you leave happily in a country where carrying concealed weapons is lawful???
Weapons must be reserved to the Police and nobody else.

Please do tell more about this "racist language."
post #1972 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by NorCal View Post

Please do tell more about this "racist language."

+1. All the recent reports I read or heard concluded that he didn't use such language.
post #1973 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by JayJay View Post

+1. All the recent reports I read or heard concluded that he didn't use such language.

The guy was known to target black guys...

Why are you defending him anyway???

He was far from being a model citizen..

If he had shot a white guy , none of you lot will even try to defend him..
post #1974 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by lasbar View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by JayJay View Post

+1. All the recent reports I read or heard concluded that he didn't use such language.

The guy was known to target black guys...

Why are you defending him anyway???

He was far from being a model citizen..

If he had shot a white guy , none of you lot will even try to defend him..

Not wanting shit made up is not "defending." I think it seems like a majority of people do not really seem to get this.
post #1975 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

Not wanting shit made up is not "defending." I think it seems like a majority of people do not really seem to get this.

No ...

We get it too well and that's the problem...

People defending him have agendas...

The usual NRA guns do not kill people ,people do brigade and the racists..

I'm a white guy and believe me I'm not a tree hugger myself but defending someone who shot a 17 years-old after being told by police officers to let him alone is just disgusting...

Why was he targeting him in the first place???

I believe in justice and believe me Zimmerman has to go to jail or it will be the beginning of a difficult path in the states with that law..

The media circus has not helped either but as a parent , I do find your position offensive...

If Zimmerman had killed my son , I will be sure that he will pay for it...

Him or someone he loves dearly...
post #1976 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by lasbar View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

Not wanting shit made up is not "defending." I think it seems like a majority of people do not really seem to get this.

No ...

We get it too well and that's the problem...

People defending him have agendas...

The usual NRA guns do not kill people ,people do brigade and the racists..

I'm a white guy and believe me I'm not a tree hugger myself but defending someone who shot a 17 years-old after being told by police officers to let him alone is just disgusting...

Why was he targeting him in the first place???

I believe in justice and believe me Zimmerman has to go to jail or it will be the beginning of a difficult path in the states with that law..

The media circus has not helped either but as a parent , I do find your position offensive...

If Zimmerman had killed my son , I will be sure that he will pay for it...

Him or someone he loves dearly...


You've just out shitted 16 Ton and he has some exceedingly shitty posts in this thread. Congrats!

Oh, btw, what is my "position?" Answer that or STFU.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lasbar View Post


Weapons must be reserved to the Police and nobody else.

Btw, since you think this, what would be your plan to assassinate someone Z loves?
post #1977 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

You've just out shitted 16 Ton and he has some exceedingly shitty posts in this thread. Congrats!
Oh, btw, what is my "position?" Answer that or STFU.
Btw, since you think this, what would be your plan to assassinate someone Z loves?

That was the problem with guys like you...

They do not have the guts to stand up for what they believe in.

What's your view on the murder of the innocent 17 years-old targeted by a loser because he was black???

Have the decency to shut up instead of playing devil's advocate..

Playing politics on a story like that makes me sick...

The problem will have been the same if Zimmerman was black and the kid is white...

A young man has been killed for no reason , taken away from his loved ones.

You have to deconstruct everything , trying to twist every shred of arguments because your argumentation is deeply tainted and biaised...

If my son had been killed , I will avenge him by any means..

Do I plan to kill Zimmerman's parents???

You're a moron.

I will most likely send him to jail because some people will do my dirty work for me..
post #1978 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by lasbar View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

You've just out shitted 16 Ton and he has some exceedingly shitty posts in this thread. Congrats!
Oh, btw, what is my "position?" Answer that or STFU.
Btw, since you think this, what would be your plan to assassinate someone Z loves?

That was the problem with guys like you...

They do not have the guts to stand up for what they believe in.

What's your view on the murder of the innocent 17 years-old targeted by a loser because he was black???

Have the decency to shut up instead of playing devil's advocate..

Playing politics on a story like that makes me sick...

The problem will have been the same if Zimmerman was black and the kid is white...

A young man has been killed for no reason , taken away from his loved ones.

You have to deconstruct everything , trying to twist every shred of arguments because your argumentation is deeply tainted and biaised...

If my son had been killed , I will avenge him by any means..

Do I plan to kill Zimmerman's parents???

You're a moron.

I will most likely send him to jail because some people will do my dirty work for me..

Excellent post.

What's the best answer to vigilantism? A vigilante assassination. Makes perfect sense.

I may be a moron but you're a self-admitted homicidal vigilante. I'll take being a moron.
post #1979 of 6250
Lasbar is dumb as shit.
post #1980 of 6250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bhowie View Post

Lasbar is dumb as shit.

This.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Events, Power and Money
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › killing Trayvon