Blacks Benefit from FL "SYG" Law at Disproportionate Rate

[himher 634]

So TM was one of the "evil" ones?

This is getting crazy.

We will never know if he was one of the "evil" ones or not. What the evidence conclusively demonstrates is that he is assuredly one of the "stupid" ones.

[himher 634]

The number of homicides increased by 300+. The SYG cases number about 100. That's at least 200 extra dead bodies a year (an almost 25% increase) that SYG generated that weren't criminals.

200 extra innocent dead people. 25% more innocent lives wasted. Just the way the NRA likes it.

Violent crime dropped from 125,825 to 93,965. Over 30,000 fewer innocent victims of violent crime (per year) since Stand Your Ground was passed. Just the way the NRA and its membership likes it.

Only people like you give a rat's a$$ if people like Treyvon Martin get killed in the middle of assaulting someone. Killing criminals in the act of committing crimes has made Florida safer. If you want to coddle violent criminals go visit the prisons, pull down your pants, and coddle them there while you bark bark for them. You aren't whipping up nearly as much support for them out here as you could "whip up" in there. You seem to like it.

[slim 1,514]

So if someone killed you, crime would go down in cinci?

Not necessarily since I'm not planning on doing any future crimes.

There are, however, people who live a life of crime. Killing those people would most certainly cut down on crime. If folks knew the punishment for any crime was death, it stands to reason they'd do fewer crimes. Only problem with that is most folks - even law abiding people - won't put up with a government that strict.

A typical holier than thou conservative mentality. Criminals are criminals for life. If a kid goes down the wrong path and gets killed, it's a win for society.IThere are different types of criminals.

If a violent kid who's been in trouble with the law a couple times already gets killed, chances are the tax payers just saved a million bucks. That's just simple numbers right there. The progressive argument is that kid just had no opportunities and buried somewhere deep down in his challenged psyche is the cure for cancer so we shouldn't just right him off. Out in the real world there's lots of data to support that he'd never have gainful employment, he'd be in and out of jail for his whole life, and he'd probably father several children - worse than him - along the way. I'm not making that up. Those are simple numbers you can google to have confirmed.

Of course we know you have convictions. I mean your statements seethe with irony.

I looked up hypocrite for you.

I agreed with you that killing all criminals would make crime go down. I didn't say I supported your position.

[RGinWA 816]

I agreed with you that killing all criminals would make crime go down. I didn't say I supported your position.

You also agreed that killing a certain 17 yo would benefit society because he was a criminal...now that makes you a hypocrite. Because in essence you are Trayvon Martin, just a little older and with a different skin pigment.

Of course TM was never convicted of anything, so there's that difference you both have.

[slim 1,514]

You also agreed that killing a certain 17 yo would benefit society because he was a criminal...now that makes you a hypocrite. Because in essence you are Trayvon Martin, just a little older and with a different skin pigment.

Of course TM was never convicted of anything, so there's that difference you both have.

I didn't say it would benefit society because he was a criminal I said it would benefit society because he's likely to cost us a lot of money down the road. He was a violent person.

Crimes of violence and crimes against persons always cost us a lot of money.

I was convicted of neither.

I don't think all criminals should be killed. If someone's speeding in their car a bullet to the head will stop them from speeding again. That's a fact. I'm not disagreeing with your point. You are correct. But saying we need to do that in order to reduce crime is not a point I'm agreeing with. I do think violent criminals who have a pattern of violence against persons (which TM did) should be dealt with swiftly and severely and often another citizen defending themselves is the cheapest way to accomplish that.

I applaud your effort to "catch me." You're almost as good as Mr. Big Dog (or is it just Big Dog?) saying I don't support paper laws. You guys are close to twisting my words around to make your point but you're missing my point in your haste to do so. That kind of makes you look like an @$$#ole. I doubt that's a position you mind looking like, but just FYI, you're reducing your own credibility as you go.

Keep it up though, you're making my job easy!

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

One and only one answer

Stealing bandwidth?

[RGinWA 816]

I didn't say it would benefit society because he was a criminal I said it would benefit society because he's likely to cost us a lot of money down the road. He was a violent person.

Crimes of violence and crimes against persons always cost us a lot of money.

I was convicted of neither.

I don't think all criminals should be killed. If someone's speeding in their car a bullet to the head will stop them from speeding again. That's a fact. I'm not disagreeing with your point. You are correct. But saying we need to do that in order to reduce crime is not a point I'm agreeing with. I do think violent criminals who have a pattern of violence against persons (which TM did) should be dealt with swiftly and severely and often another citizen defending themselves is the cheapest way to accomplish that.

I applaud your effort to "catch me." You're almost as good as Mr. Big Dog (or is it just Big Dog?) saying I don't support paper laws. You guys are close to twisting my words around to make your point but you're missing my point in your haste to do so. That kind of makes you look like an @$$#ole. I doubt that's a position you mind looking like, but just FYI, you're reducing your own credibility as you go.

Keep it up though, you're making my job easy!

They destroyed your weapon on a non-violent crime? That sounds strange.

[slim 1,514]

They destroyed your weapon on a non-violent crime? That sounds strange.

I thought so too.

But police are so enamored with the idea of "getting a gun off the streets" that they felt it was their duty to destroy it. You think there's bias against black people in the justice system... try being a gun owner!

I made sure the prosecutor understood my gun was pretty valuable and they took the cost of it off my fines.

Once my probation was up... bought a new one!