On an unrelated note, I love the idea that Jordan Davis pointed a shotgun at Dunn, threatened to kill him, and then let Dunn walk back to his car, get his gun out of the car, turn around and start shooting up the car.
Apparantly Davis was such an inept thug that rather than shooting the guy he had the drop on, he let himself get shot to death.
The only thing missing from Dunn’s bullshit story was Davis clutching his chest, looking down at his chest, then back up at Dunn and then saying “you got me.” And toppling over.
There were no overt actions or threats against Dunn.
Dunn didn’t bother to call the police. Instead, he went out and had pizza while the teen aged victim choked to death on his own blood. Then Dunn went home and went to bed. The police contacted him the next day.
The only good to come out of this is that Dunn will spend the rest of his life in prison surrounded by real thugs.
When you say “white skinheads” I assume you’re talking about white supremacists, and that is in no way a valid alternative to a random bunch of kids. The scenario you set up is not in any way comparable to or equivalent to what happened IRL.
In the scenario you described, as long as it wasn’t at night when loud noise is proscribed, then the nuns are not arseholes for not turning it down in public when asked. They have as much right to exist in public as the next person, and if they want to be loud, then they should be loud.
The jury didn’t rule he was “not guilty” of murder.
Beyond that is your position then that had the jury voted 12-0 guilty as opposed to 11-1(or whatever the breakdown was) that Davis wasn’t a thug even if all the other facts stayed the same?
No, I’m not, at least not specifically - interesting that you prejudge skinhead punks that way. If they were, and they threatened the hypothetical black man who asked them to turn it down, I’d have no sympathy with them if they got shot. Same with any other thugs, regardless of race or whatever.
No they shouldn’t. It may not be illegal, although in many places it is illegal to play loud music from a vehicle, but it is antisocial, to put it mildly.
So, of course, is shooting after a van that’s driving away from you. There’s enough blame for everybody in this story to share some.
Call him what you like, I’ve little sympathy for someone who acts like a dick and pays the price. If it’s actually determined he was murdered or otherwise killed illegally I’l be happy to call him a victim. As well as a dick.
It’s mind boggling that anyone doesn’t actually want that piece of crap Dunn in prison for a million years. Almost as mind boggling as someone who thinks a rude kid deserves the death penalty for playing loud music.
Call me old-fashioned, but ISTM that the appropriate ‘price’ for dickitude shouldn’t go beyond an old-fashioned ass-whupping.
So, could you kindly explain why you think death is an appropriate price for someone to pay for being an asshole with their radio?
Look, apparently all that matters under the FL SYG law is that it couldn’t be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Dunn didn’t fear great bodily harm, or worse.
That doesn’t change the fact that Davis got killed for doing nothing but playing the car radio loudly. I’d call that “being a victim.” If you want to be** Bricker** Jr. and substitute a rather twisted law for your own moral judgment, then that says a great deal about you, but nothing about whether Davis should be considered a victim by reasonable human beings.
Sorry, I don’t believe you. You specifically called them white skinheads, thus invoking race. You furthered that by adding in a black man who feels antagonized by them. Your current attempt to spin your own words as being non-racially charged does not in any way ring true. Your attempt to demonize me for calling out your own words is pathetic and reflects poorly on you.
Actually, obeying the law is pretty social. What’s anti-social is thinking that you deserve a special place in society, where you can ask people to do things and they must comply, because it’s not so much asking as it is demanding they follow your orders.
ETA: and yeah, shooting into a van full of unarmed people as it tries to get away from you is more than a little antisocial.
Well it’s like Heinlein said (via Lazarus Long): an armed society is a polite society. While that may have some truth to it, there’s no guarantee that the transition from rude to polite is instantaneous upon the introduction of arms, and there’s a huge potential for a lot of bloodshed and misery before the transition takes hold.
Kinda the same problem as is presented by the Libertarian notion of letting market forces deal with potential harms that may be brought about by an under-regulated economic environment.
I may be misapprehending you, but your response seems to be sort of rebuttal-flavored. If that was your intent, let me apologize for being unclear, and clarify my meaning by saying that I find Heinlein’s little proverb to be facile and simplistic, and that I was referencing it for ironic effect.
If I was misapprehending your intent, then please forgive me for THAT.
