Buster_Brown said:

Pehaps the Biblical justice of being guilty simply by thinking about adultery, for example, would prove to be a more logical system.

---

2525 said:

Buster_Brown said:

Pehaps the Biblical justice of being guilty simply by thinking about adultery, for example, would prove to be a more logical system.

---

How do they know what I am thinking about?

---

OrgoneConclusion said:

Just saw this comment un the upcoming Martin/Zimmerman trial. Of course justice will be done no matter the outcome as that is the result of the justice system.

Of course, what the poster actually meant was that he hoped the verdict would match the decision that he already made regarding the guilt or innocence of Zimmerman.

This is not mere semantic quibbling, but an observation on how most people 'think'.

---

This is quite true. Justice only ever means justice in terms of what the particular person thinks is the "just" solution - and if the outcome is different than what they think is right, the outcome was "unjust". Also the "just" outcome is never picked using rational thought but purely emotional.

OrgoneConclusion said:

Just saw this comment in the upcoming Martin/Zimmerman trial. Justice will be done no matter the outcome as that is the result of the justice system.

Of course, what the poster actually meant was that he hoped the verdict would match the decision that he already made regarding the guilt or innocence of Zimmerman.

This is not mere semantic quibbling, but an observation on how most people 'think'.

---

2525 said:

How do they know what I am thinking about?

---

tymoteusz3 said:

OrgoneConclusion said:

Just saw this comment un the upcoming Martin/Zimmerman trial. Of course justice will be done no matter the outcome as that is the result of the justice system.

Of course, what the poster actually meant was that he hoped the verdict would match the decision that he already made regarding the guilt or innocence of Zimmerman.

This is not mere semantic quibbling, but an observation on how most people 'think'.

---

This is quite true. Justice only ever means justice in terms of what the particular person thinks is the "just" solution - and if the outcome is different than what they think is right, the outcome was "unjust". Also the "just" outcome is never picked using rational thought but purely emotional.

---

johnm214 said:

Especially in the Martin case.  Unfortunatley, the people supporting conviction usually use ridiculous arguments that make legal conduct a crime and almost always are unfamiliar with the facts of the case (especially whether Zimmerman followed martin after the dispatcher suggested it wasn't neccessary, whether Martin was able to get home before turning around to confront Martin as he told witness 8 he was doing, et cet).

Often its simply "why did he need a gun?  Murderer!" and other horseshit.  Having a gun, being a racist, following someone, none of these are crimes.  Its pretty disgusting to see liberals suddenly support abandoning the rule of law and convicting someone on completely legal activities.  This is not different than convicting protestors of inciting a riot or something because you think their politicial position is reprehensible.

Its pretty much a certainty that Zimmerman will be aquited based on the evidence we've seen- perhaps someone will hang the jury, but there's no way the state is getting a second degree murder conviction.  The prosecutor in this case is a real piece of shit too- that woman should be dumped in the atlantic.

---