So no one is allowed to have an opinion on the matter until the trial is over. Someone better get a mod to shut down the dozen threads we’ve had on the subject.
Still waiting on a cite for this, other than the insane argument that saying the shooting was justified = cheering and joy over it.
This is insane. You realize that, right?
Oh, now I get it. You’re just fucking with us.
Take it to the next step. What should we do with all these evil, guilty, gun owners who are such a menace to society? Where should we built the camps to house and re-educate them?
I say we build them a home (a little place of their own). Maybe call it something catchy, like the Fletcher Memorial Home for Incurable Tyrants and Kings.
Fair enough, but we’re still talking about a statute that has no civil enforcement provision, which means the NRA has to raise a constitutional argument to enjoin the sheriff from buying up guns - and there isn’t one.
You say Zimmerman was justified, I say it was murder. He isn’t either till the trial.
As for applauding Zimmerman, one need only read between the lines of posts made here and in other sites. There was a lot of joy that an unarmed black teen was shot dead.
What to do with gun owners? Take their guns away. Once you’re disarmed, you no longer represent a threat to me.
But since we cannot adopt a rule that says, “If Lobohan says it’s wise policy, then it’s good policy,” I assume you understand we need a better way to identify wise policy.
Forgive me for (maybe) hijacking the conversation out of my idle curiosity, but does American jurisprudence not have an equivalent of the concept of our “franc/euro symbolique”, which is to say giving someone one minimum_unit_of_currency so that a given transaction be legally considered a sale or financial transaction (or a given court sentence be considered damages) even though strictly speaking market values are being thrown right out the window in the given case, for the sake of X or Y ?