It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
It was Zimmerman's unauthorized actions that caused the situation to escalate into a violent confrontation... Without the gun he would have never done that and this topic wouldn't have occurred... Why is it you folks refuse to acknowledge something so obvious.. The man killed a 17 year old boy he was hassling because he felt 10 feet tall when carrying his gun...
Originally posted by muzzleflash
reply to post by GrantedBail
Please look over this wiki:
Human Right of Self-Defense
The right of self-defense (according to U.S. law) (also called, when it applies to the defense of another, alter ego defense, defense of others, defense of a third person) is the right for civilians acting on their own behalf to engage in a level of violence, called reasonable force or defensive force, for the sake of defending one's own life or the lives of others, including, in certain circumstances, the use of deadly force.
If you support any human rights, than you MUST support this one.
In most jurisdictions, defense of self or of others is an affirmative defense to criminal charges for an act of violence. It acts to provide complete justification.
"Justification does not make a criminal use of force lawful; if the use of force is justified, it cannot be criminal at all." [2]
What does that have to do with my stance on the Constitutionally protected right to Self Defense?
Originally posted by hypervigilant
It was Zimmerman's unauthorized actions that caused the situation to escalate into a violent confrontation...
Originally posted by GrantedBail
reply to post by muzzleflash
Wrong!
Here is exactly what you said:
What does that have to do with my stance on the Constitutionally protected right to Self Defense?
You started off with an incorrect premise and went all crazy from there.
Just stop it.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Originally posted by muzzleflash
This is how bad things have become:
People claim we don't actually have a "Right to self defense" but it would "be nice if we had one".
Yet they argue completely against "The Right to self defense" and deny it's valid proven existence in our current reality.
2013-2023 (25). Twist national and international laws into a contradiction which first masks the law and afterwards hides it altogether. Substitute arbitration for law.”
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Originally posted by GrantedBail
reply to post by muzzleflash
There you go again; posting inaccuracies again. The court decided nothing. Seriously, you have no understanding of our justice system. The Judge (the court) is a mediator. They interpret the law, assess the evidence presented, and control how hearings and trials unfold in their courtrooms. Most important of all, judges are impartial decision-makers in the pursuit of justice. They make NO decisions.
Quit making stuff up!!!!
Originally posted by muzzleflash
reply to post by XTexan
I didn't say it was "IN" the Constitution.
I said it's "Constitutionally Protected".
That means all rights in the Constitution listed are automatically protected by the assumed "Right to Self Defense".
It's by default.
This means that "defending any of these rights from unreasonable harm" is legal even by deadly force.
Including the right to revolution on the grounds of protecting Constitutional authority if it is abridged/curtailed.
Read the wiki people it explains it in depth.edit on 15-7-2013 by muzzleflash because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by XTexan
Ah gotcha... Actually I was trying to back you up
2013-2023 (25). Twist national and international laws into a contradiction which first masks the law and afterwards hides it altogether. Substitute arbitration for law.”
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Originally posted by mikegrouchy
Originally posted by muzzleflash
This is how bad things have become:
People claim we don't actually have a "Right to self defense" but it would "be nice if we had one".
Yet they argue completely against "The Right to self defense" and deny it's valid proven existence in our current reality.
I agree.
And I'll raise you
a 100 year conspiracy.
It's right on time for step 25.
Mike
2013-2023 (25). Twist national and international laws into a contradiction which first masks the law and afterwards hides it altogether. Substitute arbitration for law.”
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Originally posted by GrantedBail
reply to post by mikegrouchy
What the heck??
Please, elaborate. Here is a quote from your post:
2013-2023 (25). Twist national and international laws into a contradiction which first masks the law and afterwards hides it altogether. Substitute arbitration for law.”
www.abovetopsecret.com...
I don't know maybe I am dense but what the heck are you talking about??
I am not trying to ridicule. Please don't take this wrong. I say this with the utmost of respect: Are you off your meds?? Just curious. I am a little worried about you.