Just curious

[emmitt01]

If we find out these kids had marijuana in their system or referred to this guy as a "cracker" are we supposed to acquit?

http://www.wptv.com/dpp/news/state/jordan-davis-update-michael-dunn-charged-with-first-degree-murder-trial-scheduled-for-september-23

[KRAM1]

If we find out these kids had marijuana in their system or referred to this guy as a "cracker" are we supposed to acquit?

http://www.wptv.com/dpp/news/state/jordan-davis-update-michael-dunn-charged-with-first-degree-murder-trial-scheduled-for-september-23

I am thinking it isn't a curious nature that led you to start this thread.......

[UNT90]

Let's just disregard a completely different set of facts, right?

I believe you are just stirring the pot, sir.

[meangreendork]

If we find out these kids had marijuana in their system or referred to this guy as a "cracker" are we supposed to acquit?

http://www.wptv.com/dpp/news/state/jordan-davis-update-michael-dunn-charged-with-first-degree-murder-trial-scheduled-for-september-23

Stirring the pot or not, this case should also be pretty quick to close up. Hell, let's say he was called "cracker" and they were, in fact, high.

The teens' car was searched and no firearms found. They might have talked threats up, but no action seemed to have been taken. Still, Dunn thought it was a good idea to start putting rounds into their car. I don't think SYG counts here at all. The teens appeared to have to gone back to their vehicle, meaning they probably gave ground, and then Dunn starting firing at them. I'm pretty sure that the teens dress, choice of music, body and verbal language played a part in this. There's a slight chance skin color did as well, but I can't say for sure since I don't know Dunn's attitudes on that.

And as has been said before - you never see dude that are high on weed get violent. Hungry? Sleepy? Happy? Sure. But violent? No.

[UNT90]

I wouldn't say people are never violent on weed. Some just combine violence with the munchies:

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/06/26/texas-man-accused-eating-dog-while-high-on-synthetic-marijuana/

Edited July 18, 2013 by UNT90

[UNT90]

http://www.mommyish.com/2013/04/04/pregnant-woman-beaten-after-asking-boyfriend-not-to-smoke-pot/

[UNT90]

http://www.lehighvalleylive.com/lehigh-county/index.ssf/2013/05/north_whitehall_township_man_b.html

[UNT90]

http://m.csmonitor.com/USA/2013/0421/How-did-Denver-s-4-20-marijuana-day-turn-violent

[UNT90]

http://www.kgun9.com/news/local/174681681.html?lc=Smart

[UNT90]

Basically, if you are a violent person, you are going to be a violent person when you are high.

If you're not, you won't.

Edited July 18, 2013 by UNT90

[oldguystudent]

Four articles. One of a guy smoking synthetic marijuana, otherwise known as god knows what from a gas station. One is of a guy using marijuana paraphernalia with no reference as to whether or not he had been ingesting marijuana. One is of shots fired by unidentified people, where people smoking happened to be in the area. Finally, in article number 2, is a story of one man getting violent after smoking marijuana.

I wonder if I could match, or, gasp, maybe even exceed the number of articles you've listed with bona fide stories of alcohol induced violence, possibly from even more credible sources.

I know historically that you've got a personal bent against the stuff. You particularly love to use the old reefer madness spelling of marihuana. As long as it's criminal in Texas, I am going nowhere near it.

But you're gonna be really hard pressed to convince me that it's worse than alcohol, more crime inducing than alcohol (law induced illegal trafficking and distribution, just like bootlegging, notwithstanding), or any more deserving than alcohol to be a class I drug (no legitimate uses whatsoever).

[UNT90]

Four articles. One of a guy smoking synthetic marijuana, otherwise known as god knows what from a gas station. One is of a guy using marijuana paraphernalia with no reference as to whether or not he had been ingesting marijuana. One is of shots fired by unidentified people, where people smoking happened to be in the area. Finally, in article number 2, is a story of one man getting violent after smoking marijuana.

I wonder if I could match, or, gasp, maybe even exceed the number of articles you've listed with bona fide stories of alcohol induced violence, possibly from even more credible sources.

I know historically that you've got a personal bent against the stuff. You particularly love to use the old reefer madness spelling of marihuana. As long as it's criminal in Texas, I am going nowhere near it.

But you're gonna be really hard pressed to convince me that it's worse than alcohol, more crime inducing than alcohol (law induced illegal trafficking and distribution, just like bootlegging, notwithstanding), or any more deserving than alcohol to be a class I drug (no legitimate uses whatsoever).

Never said its worse than alcohol, but if some think violent people become magically non-violent when using marihuana, they just don't know what they are talking about.

Marihuana is the proper spelling. Marijuana is slang that has been accepted by our culture.

Plus, I thought the man eats dog story was kinda funny.

[The Fake Lonnie Finch]

Let's just disregard a completely different set of facts, right?

I believe you are just stirring the pot, sir.

Bingo.

[FirefightnRick]

As a side story, and more trouble for our DOJ.

http://www.kgun9.com/news/local/Dobyns-215936401.html?lc=Smart

Didnt Charlie Sheen play this guy in a movie about his life as an undercover ATF agent in the Hell's Angels organization, or am I thinking of another movie?

Rick

[emmitt01]

As a deraimlment and attempt to shoe horn in another subject, and more trouble for our DOJ.

http://www.kgun9.com/news/local/Dobyns-215936401.html?lc=Smart

Didnt Charlie Sheen play this guy in a movie about his life as an undercover ATF agent in the Hell's Angels organization, or am I thinking of another movie?

Rick

[GreenMachine]

If we find out these kids had marijuana in their system or referred to this guy as a "cracker" are we supposed to acquit?

http://www.wptv.com/dpp/news/state/jordan-davis-update-michael-dunn-charged-with-first-degree-murder-trial-scheduled-for-september-23

Depends on what kind of crappy music they were playing.

[eulessismore]

Black kids smoking reefer??? I'm finding it hard to care. White kids doing meth? The Euless Police will be hearing from me. And anybody calling me an old white cracker? Two out of three ain't bad.

[eulessismore]

Basically, if you are a violent person, you are going to be a violent person when you are high.

If you're not, you won't.

I actually agree with you on this one post. The problem with those who end up as a news story national news with a link to marijuana only have the marijuana part reported and never the variety of other substances, mainly alcohol, but also other abusable substances, illegal or not, that they were likely also using. The other stories you used do provide a good argument against synthetic THC, advocated by the Federal Government as a better alternative to smoking the natural stuff when they were the only providers of "medical marijuana". I think the quotes should handle the "h" versus "j" issue adequately.

[UNT90]

I actually agree with you on this one post. The problem with those who end up as a news story national news with a link to marijuana only have the marijuana part reported and never the variety of other substances, mainly alcohol, but also other abusable substances, illegal or not, that they were likely also using. The other stories you used do provide a good argument against synthetic THC, advocated by the Federal Government as a better alternative to smoking the natural stuff when they were the only providers of "medical marijuana". I think the quotes should handle the "h" versus "j" issue adequately.

Not a grammar Nazi and have nothing against those who spell it with a J.

Just don't get on my arse for spelling it correctly.

[JesseMartin]

Depends on what kind of crappy music they were playing.

Sadly, this might even be a tactic used during the trial. If the music itself, or its volume, could be considered a verbal assault on someone listening, who knows...I don't know if it's ever been used successfully in terms of music (instead of coming directly from the mouth of the person involved), but the possibility is there for it to be a part of their defense. I really wouldn't expect it to fly, mind you, but you know...it's Florida. Crazy s--t happens there, at a seemingly higher concentration than elsewhere. So I wouldn't be totally shocked if his attorneys tried to play around with the definition of verbal/aural assault.