lady in the mall yesterday.

[safeinOhio]

Last edited Wed May 9, 2012, 08:34 AM - Edit history (1)

I was talking to another CCW holder about the SYG law and told him I think those SYG could use some rewording. This lady, eavesdropping behind us said "SYG laws are good and we should use them on the White House".
Typical?

[seabeyond]

1. what a man.

need a high five smilie.

[safeinOhio]

6. Good point.

I'm not pretty. However, I don't wish to kill anyone.

[tularetom]

2. Did she sing?

If so, it is over.

[DrDan]

3. typical of "ladies"? typical of the overweight?

not sure of your point.

[safeinOhio]

4. Didn't really wish to offend those that are overweight.

My point is that, all I saw when I turned around was an overweight lady, something the person had control over, wanting to kill a black man.

[Glaug-Eldare]

5. nothin to see here

Last edited Wed May 9, 2012, 08:51 AM - Edit history (1)

[safeinOhio]

7. Only if the vegetarian was attacking

the dwarf because he or she was not a vegetarian.

[Glaug-Eldare]

10. nothin to see here

Last edited Wed May 9, 2012, 08:51 AM - Edit history (1)

[Marengo]

9. And just how do you KNOW her weight is something she has control over?

[safeinOhio]

13. More to the point,

many of those that support SYG laws would like to use them at the White House.

I would have not ever thought of that until I heard it. Then too, many tea baggers are overweight middle aged people on SS or disability that hate government programs. Myself, I'm 10 pounds over what I should be, middle aged and I think I have control over my weight because at one time I was way over that. I would think she has more control over her weight than a President has control over his skin tone.
How do you feel about current SYG laws and do you agree with her?

[Marengo]

34. I'm not interested in a SYG discussion with you...

I want to know how you determined the woman's weight is "something the person had control over". In addition, why mention her weight at all, in what way is that relevant?

[safeinOhio]

39. Show me the post where you said the same

about reference to Rush's weight.

I admitted to my mistake, perhaps you might also.

[Marengo]

46. You must have me confused with someone else...

What on earth are you talking about? Where have I made reference to Rush Limbaugh's weight? What mistake?

[safeinOhio]

55. I'm talking about your outrage

about my mentioning this racist person talking about shooting up the White House and lack there of any outrage when ever someone mention Rush's problem. Search of your post show no outrage when people post about Rush. But, then it could be in your hidden post.

[Marengo]

60. LOL! Nice try, no dice...

I'm not "outraged" by your mention of her weight. On that point, I don't understand why you would do so at if not as an indication of a charachter fault in your mind.

That she is a "racist person talking about shooting up the White House" is entirely irrelevant to the discussion we are having, as is whether or not I have ever responded to a post ridiculing Limbaugh's weight. That's simply a desperate defence and deflection tactic.

No, my "outrage" as you characterize it results from your statement that you assumed her weight to be something she has control over. This is not always the case. Your statement reveals a common prejudice which I experienced first hand.

FYI, my obesity was a pharmacological side effect. Within a few months after the treatment ended, I returned to normal weight. A difference of nearly 100 pounds.

[safeinOhio]

63. I posted an apology and removed the

offensive words. That put the ball in your court. What ever you do with an apology is your concern. May I offer these words in order to free you.

The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong.-- Mahatma Gandhi
Anger makes you smaller, while forgiveness forces you to grow beyond what you were. --Cherie Carter-Scott
The offender never pardons. --George Herbert
Resentment is like a glass of poison that a man drinks; then he sits down and waits for his enemy to die.—Nelson Mandela when asked why he was not resentful for his imprisonment.
To forgive is to set a prisoner free and discover that the prisoner was you. Louis B. Smedes

Best wishes to you my friend.

[Marengo]

65. "Sorry if I offended you" is not an apology...

"4. Didn't really wish to offend those that are overweight...
My point is that, all I saw when I turned around was an overweight lady, something the person had control over, wanting to kill a black man."

What a mess of a post. First, you claim you didn't wish to offend which is well-recognized non-apology AND go on to characterize obesity as a character flaw.

"Sorry I offended you. Please don't judge me by this one post. I have corrected it and saw the error of my post.

Another "sorry if I offended you" non-apology.


"You are absolutely right as everyone missed my point.
I am prejudice, as I sometimes prejudge people. Everyone does, the difference is that those that admit it can over come it. Those that say "I not prejudice, but" can't.

And what exactly was you point in mentioning weight? Okay, so you recognize that you are prejudiced and sometimes prejudge. You're halfway there! I would suggest a clearly worded statement apologizing for assuming, or at least appearing to suggest, obese people lack self-control and are responsible for their obesity.

Otherwise, I would say the response to your post # 14:

"Sounds like you haven't learned anything but how to excuse yourself."

...is spot on.

[safeinOhio]

66. I know you feel anger and can't let go.

I would hope you seek some anger management for this problem. I'm always concerned for other gun owners and carriers that have issues with anger and hope they seek help.

[Marengo]

71. LOL! Thanks for the diagnosis doctor...

and free of charge even!

You are an MD I assume?

[Glaug-Eldare]

72. Just freakin' get over it

Accept the apology or don't. It matters very little either way. Luscious, luscious chubchubs aren't actually the focus of the thread, anyway.

[Marengo]

74. If one were to exist, I would accept it.

Oh, and I will choose to focus on whatever element of this thread I like.

But thanks anyway. Did you get a big, shiny badge when you joined the thread police? Is it in the shape of a star or shield?

[safeinOhio]

76. "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."

I see our hour is about over, same time next week?

[Marengo]

79. Something for you to ponder...

Well, it IS Wiki, so consider the source...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-apology_apology

[safeinOhio]

80. When my offensive words were pointed out to me,

I removed them. That action is not mentioned in "Non-apology".

Now, to continue and not let go of your pain, seems a little overboard. Not only to me, but even to some of those that often disagree with me on many things.

You have had the option to alert on anything that you might find offensive, please do. I will agree with a jury of my peers.

[Marengo]

81. It's still there Safe, in post #4

Can you even recognize it?

[safeinOhio]

83. Neither you or I

can assume that, THAT lady had any control over it or not. Her racist remark tainted my opinion of her being able to control anything to do with her mouth. Just as many here have commented on Rush Limbaugh's mouth and weight. I heard the comment first before I saw her. If she had not made it, my impression would have been very different than it was. I have been overweight myself and worked hard to improve it, so my experience with weight is different than yours and has contributed to my view. I'm old and suffer discrimination myself for that, for which I can't control. I don't dwell on comments about my age. Even though I'm old, I am still evolving all of the time. Now, you have made your point.

I have not heard your feelings on the lady's comment, which was the point of the post anyway.

[mvccd1000]

75. I don't understand...

...the continued demands for an apology.

Some (many? most?) obese people ARE responsible for their obesity. Is it wrong to notice this?

http://www.faqs.org/nutrition/Met-Obe/Obesity.html

Obesity is caused by many factors. A person's weight is determined by a combination of genes, metabolism, behavior, culture, and environment . Genes and metabolism may help explain about 25 to 40 percent of body weight. However, a person's environment overwhelms the minor influences of biology. While genes may increase one's risk for obesity, they do not by themselves cause obesity. Genes certainly can't explain the rapidly increasing prevalence of obesity around the world.

For most people, obesity results from eating too much and not being active enough. The overwhelming factors responsible for obesity are environmental.

The continued castigation and attempts to "call out" a member for having an opinion that does not agree with your own (even though it is backed up by experts in the health care field) certainly fits right in with some of the groups here in the Gungeon.

[Marengo]

78. None of this matters...

The question is not "is it wrong to notice" what the primary causes of obesity are, in the context of this thread it is instead why one would automatically assume weight is something ALL individuals have control over. As I have stated before, my own previous obesity was the result of medication. Once the regimen ended, my weight and appearance returned to "normal". Being obese, I was pre-judged as possessing a character flaw, as being a glutton, which I am most certainly not. The difference in attitude toward me in both stages of body appearance was shockingly evident.

I was no more "in control" of my weight than the President is of his skin tone.

Unless, of course I literally starved myself. Which I nearly did, creating a host of new health problems to deal with.

Anyway, I have also noticed an persistent and common attitude linking weight with limited intelligence and education. Surprisingly common among educated people.

Not at all acceptable to those of us who struggle with obesity NOT resulting from a character flaw, lack of intelligence, or limited education.

In regard to Safe's comment, it is prejudice, and that's the end of it. And, as I have stated before, all I see from him are "face saving" non-apologies.

As for me, I don't understand why you continue to attempt to defend his stated prejudicial opinion.

[safeinOhio]

82. Why do I feel you are going overboard on this.

You called my apology a non-apology.
See post #19

"Sorry I offended you." Note I did not say "if I offended you" That would have made it a non-apology. Also from that post " I have corrected it and saw the error of my post."

I gave you a sincere apology, by any standard and I corrected the offending statements by removing it from the post.

Please let it go and go on with your life. If you can't do so, please seek some form of help.

[Marengo]

91. Yup, a non-apology...

"Sorry I offended you" implies the person taking offensive is responsible for the existence of the offensive remark or that they are unjustifiably offended.

Instead, something along the lines of "I am sorry that I automatically assumed..." or "I am sorry that I prejudged..."

Omit the "offended you" element, and you have a genuine apology.

[pipoman]

113. We all have control over what we are offended by..

if you are "offended" it is a personal problem...You can choose to allow others to offend you or not..life is much easier if we choose not to give a shit about what others think or say.

[Marengo]

62. Oh, and what "mistake" have I made?

Still trying to figure that one out!

[rl6214]

117. "this racist person "

And how does your crystal ball come up with this conclusion, or do you just say that everyone that might oppose something a "black man" does is a racist.

[rl6214]

116. "many of those that support SYG laws would like to use them at the White House"

Care to elaborate where you came up with this bit of information?

[ellisonz]

30. How do we KNOW your gun is something you have control over?

[GreenStormCloud]

33. He wasn't carrying a gun on him.

As per numerous post of his, SafeInOhio has a CCW but rarely carries and never carries to a place like a mall. His guns were in a gun safe, inside a house that has been hardened against burglary.

If I had been there I would have been carrying, but you (If you had been there.) would not have known I was carrying.

[safeinOhio]

69. You are correct.

Neither I or the other CCW holder felt threatened enough to carry in the antique mall. No signs saying not to and I have no problem with those that wish to that are legally sane and licensed. I did have a problem with the lady that butted in on a conversation with that comment. I hope my comment, "someone might shoot back" was enough to make her feel her comment was not appropriate. It did shut her up and she walked away.

[Marengo]

47. Non sequitur. My line of inquiry concerns obesity as an alleged indicator of character fault.

It would seem safeinOhio is unaware that obesity is not always the result of a lack of dietary discipline.

[mvccd1000]

51. And yet...

... is rarely seen in places where conspicuous consumption is not considered a virtue.

You're right; it's not ALWAYS the result of a lack of dietary discipline. The odds are certainly good enough to bet on, however.

(Having put that argument out there, though, I also had to wonder what it had to do with anything in the OP.)

Safe, to answer your question, I don't think it's typical. Not typical of gun owners, gun carriers, gun supporters, women, or the obese.

[Marengo]

61. Irrelevant...

Safe presented no evidence to support his assertion that the woman's weight is something she has control over.

Why he would assume so, as I said in an earlier post, reveals a prejudice. Very common, and for those of us who experienced obesity resulting from reasons other than self-control (pharmacological in my case), very nasty.

"And yet...is rarely seen in places where conspicuous consumption is not considered a virtue.

You're right; it's not ALWAYS the result of a lack of dietary discipline. The odds are certainly good enough to bet on, however."

Doesn't matter, as the odds aren't absolute. A progressive minded person shouldn't default to a prejudice.

[safeinOhio]

68. Safe did apologize and removed the offensive remarks.

Yet, some people ignore that and go on and on with their anger. Now, that type of pathology can be helped and people can learn to go on. I would suggest anger management and a deep look inside to see what the real problem is that manifest itself in this not being able to let go.

I'm a senior citizen that can make a mistake and I try to correct them when pointed out. Some are unable to forgive the elderly for the years and years of cultural shaping. I understand this and hold no grudge against them and their lack of empathy for the elderly.

[Marengo]

73. The offensive remark I was referring to still exits in post #4

And I don't recognize a genuine apology from you in this thread. Only, as I stated before, the "sorry you were offended" variety of non-apology.

Next time, don't bother with the pseudo-psychotherapy. Spare yourself the time & effort, I don't buy a bit of that act.

[safeinOhio]

84. So you can judge me and my knowledge of psychology?

No one else can not buy into your theory(or your act) on weight control. How open minded and non bigoted of you.

When you point a finger at some one else, you have 3 fingers pointing back at yourself.

[Marengo]

89. Yup. You stated...

that the woman's weight is "something the person had control over" without any evidence. That being the case, you determined she possesses a character flaw based only on her appearance. That's not "psychology", that's something else.

"No one else can not buy into your theory(or your act) on weight control. How open minded and non bigoted of you.'

No one else can challenge your apparent view that weight is ALWAYS a matter of self-control?

"When you point a finger at some one else, you have 3 fingers pointing back at yourself."

See post #4 and apply this to yourself.

[safeinOhio]

90. Perhaps you are correct that

weight is 100% out of anyones control. Could you post some reference to it for me so I can be better informed.
While I might agree that drugs and genes can contribute to obesity, until I see some study that can lay the blame totally on those factors. I have not said or inferred "apparent view that weight is ALWAYS a matter of self-control" anymore than your view that diet and exercise have no affect on weight.

Nice try though.

[Marengo]

92. Yes, you did...

"I have not said or inferred "apparent view that weight is ALWAYS a matter of self-control"...

By automatically assuming the weight of the person in question is "something the person had control over" without having any evidence to determine this, you do so by extension for all obese persons.

[safeinOhio]

93. Ok, you gave yourself as an example.

what drug would cause a 100 pound weight gain if the person was restricting calories to 1200/day along with 1 hour of exercise? You are expecting me to assume there is such a drug and clinical papers showing that. I am assuming that other things, like drugs can be a factor in weight gain. But, not 100% like you are claiming. So, give me the evidence to determine this.

I can see when someone is obsessing about a topic and can't let it go. I'm assuming that this is not being caused by a medication.

[Marengo]

94. The onus is on you Safe, to provide evidence for your assertion...

That the subject in question has complete control over her weight. You issued a forceful statement concluding that she does without any knowledge of the subject's health or medical history.

Are you aware of the fact that obesity is common among those who suffer neuropsychiatric disorders? Considering the woman's behavior and comments, this may be a possibility. Did you think of that? Hyperphagia is a common side effect of many psychotropic medications. Would you by default assume an individual suffering from a psychiatric disorder to be in complete control of their dietary behavior?

Can you provide evidence the subject was not suffering from a neuropsychiatric disorder?

Are you also aware that several endocrine diseases have obesity as one their clinical manifestations? Cushing's syndrome comes to mind.

Can you provide evidence the subject was not suffering from endocrine disease?

I can go one, but these examples alone effectively counter you statement in post #4.

As for asking for details of my medical history? Yeah, you wish... What I have disclosed is the limit of my comfort zone. Accept it on face value or use your apparently fertile imagination and powers of remote diagnosis to create the missing elements

"But, not 100% like you are claiming."

Nope, never claimed such a thing. YOU are the only participant who has made a "100%" claim.

"I can see when someone is obsessing about a topic and can't let it go. I'm assuming that this is not being caused by a medication.'

Are you a MD Safe? An expert in the field of psychology?

[safeinOhio]

95. If you can point out,

in any post I have made where I have stated anyones weight is "100% in the persons control". There are many factor in weight gain, none are 100% responsible, except more energy in, calories, and less energy out. You made the claim that I made that claim. Show me the 100% claim.

I graduated from college with a magna cum-laude degree in psychology with a focus on Skinner Radical Behaviorism.

Now you claim that medication or disease have a 100% result in morbid obesity. Show me any clinical study that claims this 100% correlation, and that diet and exercise have a zero effect on it.


Now if you'd like to comment on the topic, SYG issue, feel free.

[Marengo]

96. It will be my pleasure...

"My point is that, all I saw when I turned around was an overweight lady, something the person had control over, wanting to kill a black man."

The underlined. It is a 100% assertion that the individual in question has complete control over her weight.

Not knowing her medical history, you cannot know this.

"I graduated from college with a magna cum-laude degree in psychology with a focus on Skinner Radical Behaviorism."

It hasn't served you well, if cannot understand that an individual who is suffering from a psychiatric illness may very well NOT be in 100% control of their dietary habits.

[safeinOhio]

99. I did not say 'the individual in question has complete control over her weight."

I did not say complete. I asserted it was to some degree under her control. Now, without asserting anything, please show where I said "100%" anywhere?

I will, more than gladly agree that "an individual who is suffering from a psychiatric illness may very well NOT be in 100% control of their dietary habits." If only 10% or 90%, but not 100% and that is exactly what I meant as I never gave a percentage and NEVER 100%.

[Marengo]

100. And therein lies the problem with your statement Safe

"but not 100% and that is exactly what I meant as I never gave a percentage...

Bingo! (to the underlined)

You never indicated a percentage. Without a quantifying modifier, the logical interpretation of your intended meaning is 100%.

Modifiers, use them.

[safeinOhio]

101. Logic?

[Marengo]

102. Perhaps you explain to me how that statement...

cannot be read to mean "100%", cannot be interpreted as "100%".

[safeinOhio]

104. Interpreted?

[Marengo]

97. Considering your education, I am shocked to discover you …

Would think it appropriate to suggest someone “seek help” as you did in posts 65 & 78 on a public political discussion board. This is highly unprofessional. You are implying I am suffering from a psychiatric disorder and I consider this an ad hominem attack. I did not seek your medical advice, nor is this a clinical setting. I cannot stress how improper this is from someone with your level of education. If you genuinely believe I am in need of counseling, you should have indicated your concern via PM, NOT in a publicly viewable thread.

[safeinOhio]

98. I would have if your real name and information was on your

profile.

[Marengo]

103. This information is not required or necessary...

for you to send private mail.

You've been an active member for a long time, do you not know how to send private mail? Click on my user name, select "Send DU Mail"?

Do you expect me to believe you weren't aware of this function?

Any comment on your unethical behavior?

[safeinOhio]

105. behavior?

[mvccd1000]

106. Speaking of behavior

Timely article from the NYT in today's google news feed:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/15/science/a-mathematical-challenge-to-obesity.html?_r=1

Very interesting article, but this little tidbit jumped out at me:

As for the genetic argument, yes, there are people who are genetically disposed to obesity, but if they live in societies where there isn’t a lot of food, they don’t get obese. For them, and for us, it’s supply that’s the issue.

I made the same argument here rather inelegantly several years ago and got shot down harshly, but it doesn't change the facts.

A reasonable person could make the bet that weight is something a person has some control over and win that bet the vast majority of the time. (99%?)

Safe, I don't consider you to be unreasonable, even if you can be hardheaded on the "right to bear arms" issue from time to time.

[Marengo]

107. When using weight or body type as an assumed measure of charachter...

The distance between 99% and 100% is vast.

[Marengo]

108. No defense of your unethical behavior?

Now, why would that be?

[Glaug-Eldare]

109. You people are still arguing about this?

The post was edited, the weight reference is gone, get over it. Have anything to say about what the actual subject of the OP?

[Marengo]

110. Still flashing that badge, eh?

[Glaug-Eldare]

111. That's a no, then. Have fun

[Marengo]

112. Yep, sure is...

As the discussion I was having with Safe and others concerned body type/weight issues, not SYG.

"Have fun"

Wow! Thanks for the permission!

[Walk away]

11. Sorry but you are a jerk. Anything you had to say means nothing because of your bigoted post. nt

[safeinOhio]

19. Sorry I offended you.

Please don't judge me by this one post. I have corrected it and saw the error of my post.

[Walk away]

20. So overweight people are safe. Who will you insult next? Blacks? The Handicapped?....

I'd rather just block you and play and not know. You can try to hide who you are but I doubt that you learned anything.

[mvccd1000]

52. Interesting to see...

... from the replies who is the judgmental bigot and who is able to rectify an error.

While Safe and I are rarely on the same side of the issues discussed in this forum, he's unfailingly polite and patient. You could find far better examples of close-minded bigots in the Gungeon than the poster you've chosen to pick on.

[DrDan]

24. shame you let your OP go astray

I think your overall point is valid. I hate the SYG law - regardless if aimed (no pun intended) at the White House or any other person. Unfortunately we now live in a time where the gun activists are letting their agressive agenda get in the way of a civilized society. They simply want a return to 1870-justice - self-appointed judge, jury and executioners.

[Glaug-Eldare]

25. I figured it was more about the lady's asinine comment

and less about the desirability of SYG laws

[DrDan]

26. yeah - you are probably right - just reread it

[aikoaiko]

29. Which is it. Do you hate SYG laws or do think they need some rewording like the OP said.

[DrDan]

35. at a minimum, reworded to add some sanity

[Glaug-Eldare]

38. How would you word them? n/t

[DrDan]

53. are you suggesting no changes are needed to the way the law is stated in Florida?

Seems to me even the supporters are open to changing the wording.

[gejohnston]

57. I'm not a lawyer

and I don't jump on band wagons, so I don't know if it should be or not.
but Zimmerman's case has nothing to do with SYG. It is either murder or would have been justifiable under duty to retreat.

[DrDan]

58. well - a lot currently involved with the case seem to think it does

to include real lawyers

[gejohnston]

70. perhaps it should

perhaps it should be more specific like Oregon's.
If you have a duty to retreat, it should be more like Wyoming's (civil immunity if you prove self defense) and not like Florida's old law.

I will say, that after taking a Florida CCW class with a bunch of former New Yorkers, I think the training requirement should be more like Texas'. If you are to go require training, at least do it right.

[hack89]

77. The question is what specific changes need to be made

I am open to changes to remove any ambiguity and to better define under what situations they do and do not apply.

But I am not hearing a lot of details of what changes are needed to prevent another Martin case.

[aikoaiko]

64. I too think it important to clarify nonprovocation with SYG.

I'm not sure what words are actually needed, but given a Martin-Zimmerman scenario I think some SYG laws could be clearer.

[DrDan]

67. I think most agree with that

[gejohnston]

32. ever take a history class?

They simply want a return to 1870-justice - self-appointed judge, jury and executioners.

SYG laws really did not start in the US until the Progressive era. BTW, California has been SYG since 1895. Wyoming still isn't (outside of the home. Inside the home, yeah). One more thing, High Noon was not a documentary.

[DrDan]

36. I am quite sure you understood my point

[gejohnston]

37. Yeah, but

not knowing history of that time and place + not understanding the SYG laws in question = hackneyed talking point.
How is Duty To (whom?) Retreat more "civilized"?

[DrDan]

54. a description of the justice I refer to follows:

"A judge would travel around the towns holding a court to try the criminals. People who were accused of these crimes would be tried by a judge who travelled around the towns. People were often hanged for their crimes. In some areas there was no sheriff or Marshall and the local townsfolk would take it on themselves to be judge and jury and would try the 'criminals' themselves. The so called criminals were often hanged and sometimes they had not trial at all and were just lynched- [hunted down and hanged from the nearest tree]."

Pretty well sums up the Zimmerman situation, doesn't it. As well as the goals of SYG.

http://www.the-wild-west.co.uk/justice.htm

[gejohnston]

56. Are you serious?

BS written on an elementary school level?

http://us.history.wisc.edu/hist102/weblect/lec03/03_05.htm

Pretty well sums up the Zimmerman situation, doesn't it. As well as the goals of SYG.

Actually, no it does not. Nor is it the goal of SYG.

[DrDan]

59. "Actually, no it does not. Nor is it the goal of SYG." - guess that is now resolved

[rl6214]

115. I didn't see anything in your OP where she said anything about "a black man".

Care to elaborate where you came up with that conclusion?

[ileus]

8. 100% spot on; all fat women want revenge for what Michelle has done to their Twinkies.

[Logical]

12. Safe, you really must be a rude and uncaring person! But...

I assume you know that! Horrible way to make your point!

[safeinOhio]

14. You are absolutely right as

everyone missed my point.

I am prejudice, as I sometimes prejudge people. Everyone does, the difference is that those that admit it can over come it. Those that say "I not prejudice, but" can't.

[Walk away]

21. Sounds like you have't learned anything but how to excuse yourself.

[safeinOhio]

15. Corrected.

[Glaug-Eldare]

18. Now we're talkin'

Last edited Wed May 9, 2012, 11:13 AM - Edit history (1)

There's a whole spectrum of gun owners, but it's true that the majority of us are politically conservative. Naturally, that includes (but is not comprised of) the worst of them, including violent bigots and twitchy conspiracy-theorists. They tend to be a lot louder and outspoken than the rest of us, so they make the entire gun rights movement look like fruitcakes. Especially on the internet, the worst of the worst have no qualms about grabbing the bullhorn and making a scene. There's no shortage of them on message boards and in chatrooms, but I suspect that there are few who would be so idiotic as the gal you met at the mall. It's unacceptable, and we (gun owners) need to do a better job than we've been doing of shoving them out of the spotlight.

[irisblue]

16. so when she suggested shooting the WH

what did you say to her? ( and, yes this is my first post in this group)

[safeinOhio]

17. "You might get shot"

that ended her comments.

[slackmaster]

22. Riveting tale

[Remmah2]

23. The poor lady.

Why did she deserve this punishment?

[tularetom]

27. Last time I checked the word "fat" was an adjective

Although it can also be a noun.

Anyway, I'm sorry the meaning of your thread got obscured by the PC cops. You didn't do anything wrong and you made a good point.

BTW I notice nobody around here gets upset when rush limbaugh is ridiculed as a fat drug addict.

[Callisto32]

28. What would you change?

[gejohnston]

31. Typical of what?

Obese people sarcastic?
misinformed about SYG?

[safeinOhio]

40. I was talking about those

that hate the half Irish President. Comment inferred that SYG laws might be used against him.

[gejohnston]

43. then she has been watching

too much MSNBC and does not understand it. If she acts on it, I would certainly support the USSS standing theirs.

[safeinOhio]

45. She has been listing to too many

teabagger racist talking about "taking our country back".

[gejohnston]

49. That too, but

using the term does not mean she knows or understand shit. If she seriously thinks Rush is the fountain of truth, then she is totally fucking stupid.

[rl6214]

118. What does being "half Irish" got to do with anything in this post

Just another reason to throw race into the mix?

[safeinOhio]

41. Just like the death penalty,

SYG laws look to be applied based on race.
http://www.alternet.org/rights/155316/are_self-defense_laws_%22whites_only%22_/

If that proves to be correct, would it change your view on SYG laws?

[gejohnston]

42. not correct and not relevant

the vast majority of killings are intra-race. That includes self defense. The number of whites killing blacks in self defense is slightly higher that blacks killing whites, but intra-race is still the vast majority. Something like 90 percent is white killing other white.
In Florida, any claim of self defense gets a hearing before a judge. If there is racial bias on the part of judges (a white getting immunity while a black would not under same circumstances) do you seriously think a full blown trial under DTR would be any better?
Is race a factor in the Zimmerman case vs the Dooley case? Who knows. The latter had eyewitnesses including SSgt James' daughter.
To answer your question, depends on why and how the statistics were like under DTR. I'm guessing they are not different.

[safeinOhio]

44. We can agree to not agree, then.

http://special.registerguard.com/web/opinion/27845771-47/ground-stand-law-florida-zimmerman.html.csp

Before the arrival of “Stand Your Ground” laws, authorities applied the test of whether a “reasonable person” would have resorted to deadly force to avoid injury or thwart an attack. “Stand Your Ground” unwisely abolishes that traditional legal test.
The Times investigation found that “Stand Your Ground” defenses have been used in bar fights, gang shootings and road-rage incidents. As a recent Times editorial said, “It gives a ‘get out of jail free’ card to people quick to feel threatened and who have a lethal weapon at their disposal.”

I would think in the Zimmerman case that, if the law was applied equally, that the vicim had every right, under the SYG law, to legally bash Zimmerman's head as he was only standing his ground against an assailant. The only problem is he is not able to speak now. Under the duty to retreat law, both would have been required to take off if able to. The police in the town were the first to say they had no reason not to believe Zimmerman and under SYG law, released him. That might be fine, if the other party had been alive to give the other side of the story. Just as a jury in a capital case must decide the death penalty with out a shadow of a doubt, if one is not going to retreat, then the use of deadly force should require "not a shadow of doubt" about death or great bodily injury. But, that is just how I see it.
Also, as the law is now, one can start a bar fight or road rage fight, then start to lose the fight and then claim SYG and pull a weapon and kill the person he started the fight with.

[gejohnston]

48. each state is different

Florida also has the "reasonable man" test. SYG abolishes nothing.

The Times investigation found that “Stand Your Ground” defenses have been used in bar fights, gang shootings and road-rage incidents. As a recent Times editorial said, “It gives a ‘get out of jail free’ card to people quick to feel threatened and who have a lethal weapon at their disposal.”

Editorials are almost always full of shit. I would have to see the evidence of their claim. Anyone can claim anything, but if the judge at the hearing says "bullshit" it goes to trial.

I would think in the Zimmerman case that, if the law was applied equally, that the vicim had every right, under the SYG law, to legally bash Zimmerman's head as he was only standing his ground against an assailant.

assuming conventional wisdom is true. Frankly, evidence does not point out to that. There is no evidence that Zimmerman confronted or attacked Martin at this point. I'm skeptical of all media claims that is not backed up with trial evidence. Google Richard Jewell. Also, read what the Florida law actually says and compare it to the media claims (including Thom Hartmann) they are nothing alike.

Also, as the law is now, one can start a bar fight or road rage fight, then start to lose the fight and then claim SYG and pull a weapon and kill the person he started the fight with.

That may be the case in Ohio, but not in Florida.

[safeinOhio]

50. I'll bet over the next

few years there will be lots of cases. I know Texas has had a few.

[BiggJawn]

85. She probably thinks Liberals should be shot on sight, too.

People like her is why I'm armed.

We need to start reporting these people to the Secret Service.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

86. "Bigot" was the first thing that crossed my mind

I was at a grocery store at 8:00am last weekend, not fully awake yet. The guy in front of me paid for his stuff, then turned around and said to me "Obama is three races". It was too early for clever conversation, so I just told him "I don't want to hear it". He left without listing the three races. I guess I'll never know.

I think he'd like your lady in the mall.

[Glaug-Eldare]

87. Well,

"unless they're the Daytona 500, the Indy 500, and the Autism Speaks Heluva Good! Sour Cream Dips 400, I don't give a damn."

[Tuesday Afternoon]

88. typical? of what? women who shop at the mall?

typical that you see fit to post it here? typical that this thread is considered OK for this group? typical. yeah. typical alright.

[rl6214]

114. Story has nothing to do with RKBA

Maybe it should be in the Lounge or Politics forums.