On Strong Opinions about Guns.

[Robert_S]

It occurs to me that some, but not all, people who are very pro-gun value gun ownership that strongly because they're just the kind of assholes that inspire otherwise peaceful people to violent rage. They're afraid of losing their guns because they feel that they might have to be nicer to survive otherwise.

On the other hand, quite a few, but not all, people who are strongly against gun ownership are just the kind of assholes that inspire otherwise peaceful people to violent rage. They're afraid of other people having guns because they feel they might have to be nicer to survive otherwise.

Or maybe I'm just trolling.

[SteveB]

I care about this topic!

[Jason]

It occurs to me that some, but not all, people who are very pro-gun value gun ownership that strongly because they're just the kind of assholes that inspire otherwise peaceful people to violent rage. They're afraid of losing their guns because they feel that they might have to be nicer to survive otherwise.

On the other hand, quite a few, but not all, people who are strongly against gun ownership are just the kind of assholes that inspire otherwise peaceful people to violent rage. They're afraid of other people having guns because they feel they might have to be nicer to survive otherwise.

Or maybe I'm just trolling.

[Blind groper]

I am against hand gun ownership because it kills people.

[FBM]

If, in the OP, you were to replace "Guns" with

a) politics
b) sports
c) economics
d) race
e) sexual orientation
f) religion

etc, etc, you'd still have a strong point. Seems to me that not being an asshole about it is more important than having the "right" opinion.

[Seth]

I am against hand gun ownership because it kills people.

Sometimes people need to be killed.

[FBM]

I recall a joke about "He needed killin'" being a legitimate legal defense in the South.

[Robert_S]

I'm disappointed with our current gun laws because the country's still full of asshats.

[Pappa]

I recall a joke about "He needed killin'" being a legitimate legal defense in the South.

Edward Muybridge got away with murdering his wife's lover because the judge felt the guy deserved it.

[FBM]

I recall a joke about "He needed killin'" being a legitimate legal defense in the South.

Edward Muybridge got away with murdering his wife's lover because the judge felt the guy deserved it.

I had to google that. Turns out the jury went against the judge's advice and ruled it "justifiable homicide."

[Blind groper]

The Muybridge case was in 1874. That was a time of strong religious belief of the Old Testament sort. People were not rational. I would hope no modern jury would be that downright stupid.

[FBM]

The Muybridge case was in 1874. That was a time of strong religious belief of the Old Testament sort. People were not rational. I would hope no modern jury would be that downright stupid.

I think today his history of head injury, coupled with erratic emotional outbursts in court, would probably convince the jury that he was medically excusable.

[Hermit]

The Muybridge case was in 1874. That was a time of strong religious belief of the Old Testament sort. People were not rational. I would hope no modern jury would be that downright stupid.

I think today his history of head injury, coupled with erratic emotional outbursts in court, would probably convince the jury that he was medically excusable.

Doubt it. His admission in court that his action was premeditated alone would have led to a conviction, and the notion of "crimes of passion" as a get out of gaol card has disappeared decades ago.

[MrJonno]

Crime of passion is still a mitigating circumstance in just about all countries, it doesnt normally make you innocent but may need to a lesser charge, sentence or even a complete aquittal on ground of temporary insanity (where you should still be locked up in a hospital instead of a prison)

The motivation and mindset is as fundamental as the action in any legal system

[FBM]

One thing is likely, these days a buttload of time and money would be spent on psychiatric evals before it went to the jury.