Nine out of 10 Illinois sheriffs WILL NOT ENFORCE new gun law

Eightcrackers said:
If.
And that is a very big if, that you don't seem to acknowledge - you think that "try" = "succeed", for some reason.

The state did not find him not guilty; a jury of his peers did.
Click to expand...
Your dodging my question. If they succeed what are the chances of a pregnancy?

And the state honors their verdict. Not guilty. So even if he did do it he is innocent of all chargers. State says so. So he is a innocent murderer. LOL
 
  • Like
Reactions: BMS
vibise said:
One difference is that the fugitive slave law was challenged by state courts and legislatures and then repealed, whereas the situation with sheriffs is refusal of individual law officers to enforce the law with no legal or legislative support.
Click to expand...
How much time elapsed before the courts decided and how many slaves were returned? Your message to the slaves, Too bad you were caught before the law got challenged.
 
Reformedguy said:
Your dodging my question. If they succeed what are the chances of a pregnancy?
Click to expand...
Zero.

If they try, what are their chances of success?

I answered yours, now, you answer mine.
Reformedguy said:
And the state honors their verdict. Not guilty. So even if he did do it he is innocent of all chargers. State says so. So he is a innocent murderer. LOL
Click to expand...
You went from "not guilty" to "innocent" - changing terms, and hoping we won't notice, is something you do a lot...

If he did it, he is guilty, not innocent; he was merely found not guilty.
 
Eightcrackers said:
Zero.

If they try, what are their chances of success?

I answered yours, now, you answer mine.

You went from "not guilty" to "innocent" - changing terms, and hoping we won't notice, is something you do a lot...

If he did it, he is guilty, not innocent; he was merely found not guilty.
Click to expand...
Depends on their will power I guess right??

I see no discernable difference. Not guilty seems to imply innocence. What does not guilty mean?

The state says otherwise. A innocent murderer. The state decides remember?
 
Eightcrackers said:
Zero.

If they try, what are their chances of success?

I answered yours, now, you answer mine.

You went from "not guilty" to "innocent" - changing terms, and hoping we won't notice, is something you do a lot...

If he did it, he is guilty, not innocent; he was merely found not guilty.
Click to expand...
Exactly
 
Reformedguy said:
Depends on their will power I guess right??
Click to expand...
Bullseye.

So, when abstinence is tried, the probability of pregnancy depends on their willpower.

Glad we cleared that up.
Finally.
Reformedguy said:
I see no discernable difference. Not guilty seems to imply innocence.
Click to expand...
No, it doesn't.
In a judicial setting, it means only that the prosecution failed to convince the jury - they try to remove doubt, while the defence tries to introduce it.
Reformedguy said:
What does not guilty mean?
Click to expand...
When it's a verdict, "the prosecution failed".
When spoken in common parlance, "innocent".

We've been over this.
Reformedguy said:
The state says otherwise. A innocent murderer.
Click to expand...
A potential murderer, found not guilty.

The jury's verdict does alter the fact of whether or not he did it.
 
Eightcrackers said:
Bullseye.

So, when abstinence is tried, the probability of pregnancy depends on their willpower.

Glad we cleared that up.
Finally.

No, it doesn't.
In a judicial setting, it means only that the prosecution failed to convince the jury - they try to remove doubt, while the defence tries to introduce it.

When it's a verdict, "the prosecution failed".
When spoken in common parlance, "innocent".

We've been over this.

A potential murderer, found not guilty.

The jury's verdict does alter the fact of whether or not he did it.
Click to expand...
Never said otherwise and it's irrelevant as to whether it is effective in preventing pregnancy.

Right, so let's say he actually committed the crime. Was it murder? Not according to the state right?
 
Reformedguy said:
Never said otherwise and it's irrelevant as to whether it is effective in preventing pregnancy.
Click to expand...
Abstinence is only as effective as the willpower of the participant/s - correct?
Reformedguy said:
Right, so let's say he actually committed the crime. Was it murder?
Click to expand...
Yes.
It was murder whether or not he was found guilty.

What the state considers a crime, doesn't cease to be a crime just because nobody knows you've done it, or nobody can prove you did it.
 
Eightcrackers said:
Abstinence is only as effective as the willpower of the participant/s - correct?

Yes.
It was murder whether or not he was found guilty.

What the state considers a crime, doesn't cease to be a crime just because nobody knows you've done it, or nobody can prove you did it.
Click to expand...
Yup, and when it's successful it never fails. Correct? Yes or no?

No. Sorry. The state says nope. Your free to go innocent murderer. Innocent until proven guilty.
 
Reformedguy said:
No. Sorry. The state says nope. Your free to go innocent murderer. Innocent until proven guilty.
Click to expand...
Innocence is only presumed for the purposes of trial.

Neither the State, nor the jury, have deemed OJ Simpson to be innocent of murder.
Have you not wondered why the verdict is "not guilty", rather than "innocent"?
 
Eightcrackers said:
Innocence is only presumed for the purposes of trial.

Neither the State, nor the jury, have deemed OJ Simpson to be innocent of murder.
Have you not wondered why the verdict is "not guilty", rather than "innocent"?
Click to expand...
Innocent until proven guilty. Not guilty presumes innocence.

No, I haven't given your innocent until proven otherwise.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top