The Battle Bar, Our Wretched Hive of Scum and Villainy

Started by Lord Lucien3,287 pages

I'm willing to bet the artist is a fan of Thor, and was all like "Hur what if Jedis did that too heh he."

For those of you remotely interested in political philosophy, I recommend <b>Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think</b> . It's one of the most informative books i've read on the topic. It outlines in great detail, the rationale of liberals and conservatives, through a cognitive science perspective. Of course this book was written in 2002 and we've seen many of the left/right philosophies cross over (most of my philosophies are right, some are left) but this book is a great baseline.

Vader is a cyborg. Maybe he altered his robo-wrist.

So wat up everyone?.

What does everyone think of the Zimmerman Vs Martin case?. Guilty or not Guilty?.

I believe Zimmerman was not guilty and had everyright to defend himself. The fact the case even went to court shows how ****ed up our system is.

He killed someone... Why the hell would it not go to court?

Originally posted by ares834
He killed someone... Why the hell would it [b]not go to court? [/B]

Because it was self defense according to the florida law and stand your ground. Saying he shouldint have gone to court is my bad but he defenitly was not guilty. He had to go to court ofcourse I worded that wrong but he was still not guilty.

Yeah... even if you kill someone in self-defense, you still need to go to court...

Anyway, as far as legality is concerned, yes. He isn't guilty by Florida law.

Originally posted by Tzeentch._
Yeah... even if you kill someone in self-defense, you still need to go to court...

Anyway, as far as legality is concerned, yes. He isn't guilty by Florida law.

1.Yes.

2.He should be non guilty in any state.

you don't know any better than we do. the jury said not guilty, so I'll agree with them.

Originally posted by ROTJ Vader
So wat up everyone?.

What does everyone think of the Zimmerman Vs Martin case?. Guilty or not Guilty?.

I believe Zimmerman was not guilty and had everyright to defend himself. The fact the case even went to court shows how ****ed up our system is.

Zimmerman v. Martin? What, did he come back from the dead?

Originally posted by ROTJ Vader
1.Yes.

2.He should be non guilty in any state.

It isn't legal in any state to shoot someone because they're punching you.

In California, he almost certainly would have been found guilty of manslaughter, at the least unintentional manslaughter.

Originally posted by Tzeentch._
It isn't legal in any state to shoot someone because they're punching you.

In California, he almost certainly would have been found guilty of manslaughter, at the least unintentional manslaughter.

Martin was a threat to his life and was using racial slurs. Zimmerman had everyright to shoot the thug.

Originally posted by ROTJ Vader
Martin was a threat to his life and was using racial slurs. Zimmerman had everyright to shoot the thug.
The first part of your first sentence notwithstanding, how the f*ck do you justify shooting someone based on racial slurs?

Originally posted by ROTJ Vader
Martin was a threat to his life and was using racial slurs. Zimmerman had everyright to shoot the thug.

Insulting someone does not automatically mean bring out the guns.

Exactly, knives are a much more painful and fitting response.

You can savor all the little... emotions.

Hey guys, is anybody here listening to the "Welcome to Night Vale" podcast?

It is kind of absurd but I like the way it bounces between ominous and endearing.

Originally posted by Vensai
Insulting someone does not automatically mean bring out the guns.

He attacked him.

Originally posted by Zampanó
Hey guys, is anybody here listening to the "Welcome to Night Vale" podcast?

Im curious to know what is that?.