[supersloth]

did i quote you? did i say

"neither does shooting them with a gun" -atraub ?

or are you projecting?

[atraub]

haha ok, so you're just interjecting nonsense for no reason. Forgive me for misunderstanding.

[supersloth]

no problem, seems to be a pretty recurring pattern with you.

[macosxnerd101]

Quote

unsafe and "departure from rational behavior" are different things. The mere act of following someone does not inherently put the person you're following into any actual danger.

The thought process if one believes the person they are following though is a criminal is a bit different than just following some Joe Schmoe.

[atraub]

That may be true, but that doesn't change the inherent truth that Trayvon was in absolutely no danger until he started throwing punches.

This post has been edited by atraub: 16 July 2013 - 10:35 AM

[h4nnib4l]

How was he supposed to know that?

[atraub]

Attacking someone because they could theoretically be a threat is not a rational response.

[h4nnib4l]

You're a moving target. What you said is "...the inherent truth that Trayvon was in absolutely no danger until he started throwing punches" to which I replied "How was he supposed to know that?"

[atraub]

To which I said, attacking someone because they theoretically might be a threat is not a rational response. In other words: Even if Trayvon suspected that Zimmerman was a threat, that does not mean bashing Zimmerman's face in is a rational response. Whether or not Trayvon felt threatened is utterly irrelevant as far as I'm concerned. It's when he escalated the situation to violence that this became a self-defense issue.

[supersloth]

i just don't understand how anyone can rationalize trayvon's self defense is irrational and anything zimmerman did as rational. that just involves this level of doublethink i can't even comprehend.

[h4nnib4l]

You still haven't answered my question. I'm questioning something that you give as an "inherent truth" and I disagree with. You ignore that, and come from a different angle. I understand your argument tactics from a battlefield perspective: they are not effective for rational conversation, but rather to defeat an enemy. If that's all you're trying to accomplish, go for it I guess, I just didn't know that that's what we're doing...

[macosxnerd101]

When we don't agree with others, let's not try to rationally and logically dissect their arguments, but rather ignore them altogether and push our views. Maybe if we do that enough, the other party will just magically agree!

[BenignDesign]

Finally read this thread.

This is how it made me feel:

[trevster344]

I just skipped to the end after the first page. I'm glad someone expressed how I felt.

[supersloth]

if you felt that way after reading one page and skipping to the end just imagine how you would feel if you decided to read all EIGHT of them. holy shit would you feel bad.