Monday, July 16, 2012

It is official: Floridians are Morons. By Geniusofdespair

64% of Floridians support the Stand Your Ground Law. North Florida, of course has more morons than anywhere else, they support Stand Your Ground by a margin of 71%. Boy, where were all the people when they were passing out brains in Florida? Armed and standing their ground I guess.

19 comments:

Rick said...

"Boy, where were all the people when they were passing out brains in Florida?"

Voting for Rick Scott.


.

Anonymous said...

voting for Lynda Bell.

Anonymous said...

So you think we should turn and run if threatened with deadly harm and not stay and defend ourselves. Maybe a cop could respond in the average 8 min it takes to get there.

Geniusofdespair said...

What is wrong with the old way, why kill people?

The primary difference between common-law self-defense and “Stand Your Ground” is the matter of retreat. While “Stand Your Ground” abolished the duty to retreat, common-law self-defense requires one–outside of the home or curtilage–to retreat if possible, and if doing so will avoid the need to use deadly force. (Falco v. State, 407 So. 2d 203)

Anonymous said...

The black community supports Stand Your Ground in the lowest percentage as they are most likely to be killed by scared whites packing weapons.

Geniusofdespair said...

Blacks support it at 27%.

Anonymous said...

Obama carried Florida in 2008, good point.

Howard said...

And Bush in 2004. Better point.

Anonymous said...

And Gore in 2000. No point at all.

Anonymous said...

Florida has it right. Come at me with the intent tof killing and/or inflicting serious bodily harm and you risk the same, immediately. Why should I have to retreat? Don't advance, dumb ass!!!

Chauncy said...

The poll showed that the only people who are against the Stand Your Ground law are burglars and left-wing bloggers.

Anonymous said...

Like tv ads, I am trying to avoid considering these "polls" that end up on the front page of our newspaper. First, lets consider the demographics: 800 people that are home and answer the phone and actually have the time to sit on the phone with the interviewer answering these questions. People with that kind of time are retired, unemployed, and generally people without a life. Most of the people I know just don't even bother with these phone calls. Who else do they call? That would be the people that answered the phone in the past. Wingnuts with nothing better to do. Anybody reading this blog, including the people that lean towards the right, did you get a phone call?

These "surveys" must have a hugh error margin. 800 people? Don't make me laugh. Take a statistical analysis course to find out why these surveys are so inaccurate. And please, would the newspapers stop using these surveys as if they are real news.

tom

Geniusofdespair said...

Point made in comments: morons.

Anonymous said...

As someone who has been robbed at knife point, I fully agree with the stand your ground. F that guy who put a knife on my. If my wife or kids where there it would have been worse. I wish I had a gun, I would have shot him with as many bullets the gun held. Now, that being said, Under no circimstances do I beleive I should go start a fight and if I start to get my ass kicked pull a gun and start shooting. That to me is common sense, but you don't get much of that here.

Anonymous said...

If you were to take it away, might I be accused of committing a "hate" crime if I defended myself? (Talk about moronic.)

Anonymous said...

Another moron here. I also support the law (as I understand it). :)

However, I still appreciate this blog. Providing the information, and asking nothing in return, give G.o.D. the right to call me what he wants. :)

On to another topic where I might agree with the authors. :)

Geniusofdespair said...

AS YOU UNDERSTAND IT

It gives criminals freedom to execute people (criminals can use this law) anyway, you are now my favorite reader...

Stand Your Ground laws should be repealed because:

1. They require “law enforcement officials to prove that a suspect did not act in self-defense. [NYT] ” This burden of proof is a bridge too far on the presumption of innocence continuum. You cannot prove motive with confidence on the basis of circumstantial evidence when the other guy happens to be dead.

2. They protect shooters from civil suits, where the burden of proof for a civil judgement is lower. This means that when the state doesn’t press charges, no civil options remain to the victim’s family.

3. Many of the victims have been unarmed (12 of 13 studied in a recent Orlando Sentinel investigation).

4. Police chiefs do not understand the laws, and thus abrogate their duty to investigate fully in the first crucial hours following an incident, allowing vital forensic evidence to be destroyed.

5. Clueless gun owners, like George Zimmerman, who are inclined to ignore or misunderstand regulations regarding use of a firearm, will falsely believe they have rights that they do not, in reality, possess.

6. They encourage vigilantism by codifying a set of assumptions that magnifies the real degree of threat posed by “suspicious” persons possessed of unknown intent. This effect is exacerbated by racial profiling, as well as outright racism, and further fueled by the now well-known “hoodie effect.”

7. They represent an attempt to “normalize” the use of firearms in situations where the standard of proof is that of “feeling threatened,” a standard that is not codified with objective criteria under the laws.

8. People under investigation for having committed a crime involving the use of a firearm already possess a presumption of innocence.

9. They serve to reinforce the brutality of American society, driven by a paranoid sense of threat experienced by some armed civilians.

10. They represent a license to kill. And, as I have said before, it’s not gun nuts who bother me, it’s nuts with guns. I agree with Chattanooga, Tennessee gun enthusiast Sally Peterson who told WRCB TV,"You can't approach a person and draw your gun. I just think there are too many wannabe cops.”

http://open.salon.com/blog/steve_klingaman/2012/04/11/ten_reasons_to_repeal_stand_your_ground_laws

Anonymous said...

This is why there has been a backlash against those who are characterized as "Elitist"

"Disagree with me and you are a moron" "I know better than you and therefore, I think I should dictate how society should be run"

I completely disagree with Obamacare, but I don't think those that support it are morons. I think they are for the most part well intentioned, but do not understand the consequences of another Trillion dollar government program will have on this country & the extent of power government will have over our lives. Misguided yes, morons no.

You are essentially the "Man of System", who would like to design a society from the top down and believe we are human chess pieces that will act as you believe appropriate. The only problem is humanity has their own will and individuality and will find ways to go where they want to go.

The only way you change an individual is to convict them morally. Unfortunately for you this would require a belief that the Man of System truly has their best interest in mind and loves them unconditionally.

Not very convincing when you are calling them morons!

Geniusofdespair said...

I am satisfied to call them Morons. You can go try to change them. I am writing a popular blog you can write your own. Don't tell me how ro write my blog and change it to pablum writing trying to reason with T party lunatics. I would NEVER be able to change them and no one would read this blog..