Zimmerman was on the ground being punched when he shot Trayvon Martin

General Buck Turgidson said:
You're ignoring the fact that white males are the only people who have no biases in their perspective on the world.
Click to expand...

I know. I have said before that some of them here just don't get that white is a race and male is a gender. And I don't really understand how anyone who has ever read, say someone like W.E.B. DuBois, could not understand what is meant by perspective? Or how anyone who has ever read him could believe that a white person could ever write from anything other than a white perspective? It truly boggles my mind. But the thing is, they really don't get it.

Maybe they have never read any works by black intellectuals? I wish I could make everyone here read The Souls of Black Folks, at the very least. I mean, at the very, very, least.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
how is it not possible? I spent 6 years in the USMC where it was drilled in to us that there is only ONE color.....marine corps green. that was it. racism was not tolerated at all. my youth was spent pretty much the same way. I didn't care about color. at all.

so yes, darla, it is possible to write from a non color perspective, if your mind is open enough to it.
Click to expand...

You were brainwashed then. There is NOT only one color, and only a white person could ever make this statement! (outside of the military at any rate).
 
Darla said:
I know. I have said before that some of them here just don't get that white is a race and male is a gender. And I don't really understand how anyone who has ever read, say someone like W.E.B. DuBois, could not understand what is meant by perspective? Or how anyone who has ever read him could believe that a white person could ever write from anything other than a white perspective? It truly boggles my mind. But the thing is, they really don't get it.

Maybe they have never read any works by black intellectuals? I wish I could make everyone here read The Souls of Black Folks, at the very least. I mean, at the very, very, least.
Click to expand...

http://www.bartleby.com/114/
 
Just one last thing, I may not be able to come back to this - stating that a white person cannot write from the black perspective, is NOT, in any way, saying that you are racist.

This is what that idiot (not sty) can't understand. I mean, I am getting kind of amazed at some of those posts? Huh???

But, to make certain that no one is putting words in my mouth, please refer back to this.
 
Darla said:
Just one last thing, I may not be able to come back to this - stating that a white person cannot write from the black perspective, is NOT, in any way, saying that you are racist.

This is what that idiot (not sty) can't understand. I mean, I am getting kind of amazed at some of those posts? Huh???

But, to make certain that no one is putting words in my mouth, please refer back to this.
Click to expand...

For those who actually want the truth, rather than Darla's nonsense above...

She posted:

Originally Posted by Darla View Post
No. I know you really don't get this but you write from the perspective of a white male. You just do. Just as I write from the perspective of a white woman. I think that it's important to expose ourselves to all voices. I loved blackascoal because I learned a great deal from him. And he and I had plenty of big fights, believe me. But he was always, always, illuminating and he always made you think.
Click to expand...

I responded:

Once again, Darla the sexist proclaims white men can't ever understand because they are white. Truly comical.
Click to expand...

Yet she warps this into something it is not. She consistently proclaims what white men can and cannot 'get/understand' etc... I mocked her for the ignorance of her comment.

Apparently she is under the impression we can't go back and actually look at what was written. Or she assumes the liberal lemmings will just go along with it (which morons like Mutt will)
 
Superfreak said:
Damn Yankee???

BAC was way to the left, but at least he could support his positions, unlike many of the liberals on the board today who simply proclaim something and then refuse to actually defend their positions.
Click to expand...


So you consider Dixie, Yurt and bravo to be Liberals?

Because all three have done just what you claim...
 
SmarterThanYou said:
firstly, the 'rule of law' was already being broken by two idiots stealing stuff that wasn't theirs. Secondly, it is completely lawful to use force to stop a felony crime in progress, which apparently was also what the two 'victims' were committing when shot. So technically, no law was being broken. Thirdly, the 'rule of law' is subject to interpretation and a majority of texans felt that 'the rule of law' includes lethal force against fleeing felons.
Click to expand...


No...the two "suspects" were leaving the scene of a crime when shot by Horn. Until they were searched AFTER BEING SHOT, there was ZERO EVIDENCE they were the same two who broke into his neighbor's house.

Second...the two men shot were shot IN THE BACK, indicating there was NO THREAT to Horn whatsoever...and I hate to burst your bubble, the the "castle doctrine" allows someone to shoot, IF the crime is being committed on YOUR OWN property...which in this case it WASN'T.

So a majority of Texans approve of vigilante justice...good for them.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
how is it not possible? I spent 6 years in the USMC where it was drilled in to us that there is only ONE color.....marine corps green. that was it. racism was not tolerated at all. my youth was spent pretty much the same way. I didn't care about color. at all.

so yes, darla, it is possible to write from a non color perspective, if your mind is open enough to it.
Click to expand...


Funny.....lol.....you're talking to liberal Democrats about having an open mind ?.....why not talk to your cat about nuclear power....:palm:
 
SmarterThanYou said:
that is merely your perception because you're focused on race. I'm telling you that the media wouldn't have nationalized this had martin been white because they wouldn't have really cared.
Click to expand...

I am telling you that the kid would still be alive if he wasn't black, which is of vastly more import than whether or not the media is racist.
F.Y.I., what made the news in this case is the fact that the known killer was not arrested or charged.
 
Darla said:
I know. I have said before that some of them here just don't get that white is a race and male is a gender. And I don't really understand how anyone who has ever read, say someone like W.E.B. DuBois, could not understand what is meant by perspective? Or how anyone who has ever read him could believe that a white person could ever write from anything other than a white perspective? It truly boggles my mind. But the thing is, they really don't get it.

Maybe they have never read any works by black intellectuals? I wish I could make everyone here read The Souls of Black Folks, at the very least. I mean, at the very, very, least.
Click to expand...


We all view things from our own perspectives....even you.....
That doesn't preclude us from having a open mind or understanding issues from a different viewpoint.....and that certainly doesn't make that
different viewpoint valid, its just different.......facts will remain facts regardless of perspective......
 
bravo said:
We all view things from our own perspectives....even you.....
That doesn't preclude us from having a open mind or understanding issues from a different viewpoint.....and that certainly doesn't make that
different viewpoint valid, its just different.......facts will remain facts regardless of perspective......
Click to expand...

If this is true, why do you choose to misunderstand so much?
 
ZappasGuitar said:
No...the two "suspects" were leaving the scene of a crime when shot by Horn. Until they were searched AFTER BEING SHOT, there was ZERO EVIDENCE they were the same two who broke into his neighbor's house.
Click to expand...
he made the 911 call because he saw them breaking in. this wasn't some 'i don't know you so i'm going to kill you' type of scenario.

ZappasGuitar said:
Second...the two men shot were shot IN THE BACK, indicating there was NO THREAT to Horn whatsoever...and I hate to burst your bubble, the the "castle doctrine" allows someone to shoot, IF the crime is being committed on YOUR OWN property...which in this case it WASN'T.
Click to expand...
you keep confusing laws. you shouldn't try to argue points of law if you don't know the law.

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/docs/PE/htm/PE.9.htm

SUBCHAPTER D. PROTECTION OF PROPERTY

Sec. 9.41. PROTECTION OF ONE'S OWN PROPERTY. (a) A person in lawful possession of land or tangible, movable property is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to prevent or terminate the other's trespass on the land or unlawful interference with the property.

(b) A person unlawfully dispossessed of land or tangible, movable property by another is justified in using force against the other when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to reenter the land or recover the property if the actor uses the force immediately or in fresh pursuit after the dispossession and:

(1) the actor reasonably believes the other had no claim of right when he dispossessed the actor; or

(2) the other accomplished the dispossession by using force, threat, or fraud against the actor.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.


Sec. 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:

(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and

(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:

(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or

(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and

(3) he reasonably believes that:

(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or

(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.

ZappasGuitar said:
So a majority of Texans approve of vigilante justice...good for them.
Click to expand...
I don't see you condemning the new black panther party for their 'dead or alive' poster.
 
hoodie.jpg


cartoon-stand-your-ground-jpg.jpg


trayvon-shoot-watcher.jpg
 
SmarterThanYou said:
he made the 911 call because he saw them breaking in. this wasn't some 'i don't know you so i'm going to kill you' type of scenario.
Click to expand...


He saw two men on someone else's property...


SmarterThanYou said:
you keep confusing laws. you shouldn't try to argue points of law if you don't know the law.

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/docs/PE/htm/PE.9.htm

SUBCHAPTER D. PROTECTION OF PROPERTY

Sec. 9.41. PROTECTION OF ONE'S OWN PROPERTY. (a) A person in lawful possession of land or tangible, movable property is justified in using force against another when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to prevent or terminate the other's trespass on the land or unlawful interference with the property.

(b) A person unlawfully dispossessed of land or tangible, movable property by another is justified in using force against the other when and to the degree the actor reasonably believes the force is immediately necessary to reenter the land or recover the property if the actor uses the force immediately or in fresh pursuit after the dispossession and:

(1) the actor reasonably believes the other had no claim of right when he dispossessed the actor; or

(2) the other accomplished the dispossession by using force, threat, or fraud against the actor.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.


Sec. 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:

(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and

(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:

(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or

(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and

(3) he reasonably believes that:

(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or

(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
Click to expand...


This just backs up what I claimed...he shot two men who came no where near his property...he committed a crime.


I
SmarterThanYou said:
don't see you condemning the new black panther party for their 'dead or alive' poster.
Click to expand...

When and if they ever follow through on a threat like that on the poster, then I will condemn them like I condemn braindead vigilantes for taking the law into their own hands.
 
Rune said:
I am telling you that the kid would still be alive if he wasn't black, which is of vastly more import than whether or not the media is racist.
F.Y.I., what made the news in this case is the fact that the known killer was not arrested or charged.
Click to expand...
Dune, I'd have shot the kid whether he was black, brown, white, red, or yellow simply because he charged at or hit me. you're making this out of race for political purposes only. You would not be screaming and ranting like this if a black man had shot a white man and had not been arrested because he claimed self defense. I know it, you know it.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
He saw two men on someone else's property...
Click to expand...
you are wrong. just admit it. he called 911 because he saw two men breaking in to his neighbors home.

ZappasGuitar said:
This just backs up what I claimed...he shot two men who came no where near his property...he committed a crime.
Click to expand...
no, it doesn't. it proves you totally wrong. he committed no crime or a grand jury would not have cleared him of wrongdoing.


ZappasGuitar said:
When and if they ever follow through on a threat like that on the poster, then I will condemn them like I condemn braindead vigilantes for taking the law into their own hands.
Click to expand...
so dead or alive posters and cross hairs posters are mighty ok with you, so long as nobody acts on their threat?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top