What if the liver owner was an awful person? And what if orphan did it without knowing that the liver owner is an awful person? Do you get the shortcut karma or do you hit all the bumps on the road? Good/evil math is hard.
What made you lose faith in humanity today?
- Thread starter Goker
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Giving to beggars is just an obschene modern individualised indulgensche where the pricsche of bourgeois guilt is built in to the prische of buying a hobo a heroin hit
Why do you like that scary accent so?
Is it Scottish?
It's Zizek.
Cyborg Eastern European said:
Because white people are so mystical and exotic, their translucent skin is so alluring and strange, and I love their martial arts like Hema and their beautiful spiritual religions like Catholicism. I learned so much about their holistic spiritual culture on my backpacking tour to the Vatican City. I was blessed by a real priest, saw real Europeans in traditional dress, and stroked real European hair. Us Jamaicans are so out of touch with nature and I believe there is so much we can learn from their simple but happy existence.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-48789836
This is insane. Two women, one pregnant, get into an argument about the unborn child's father. The expectant mother- Marshae Jones- is shot in the stomach by Ebony Jemison, later resulting in the miscarriage of the baby (I'm not certain from the article whether the baby is known to have died instantly or hours/days later; I think probably it was later on, judging by the wording). Jemison was charged with manslaughter (of the baby), but a grand jury failed to indict her (does this mean the jury couldn't decide whether she should even face a court case? I am not familiar with the US terminology). Now here comes the insane bit; the mother herself has been charged on the basis that she began the argument.
I don't care if she started the argument or not, you can't say she is responsible for a shooting just because she began an argument. Of course it is particularly perverse that she lost her baby and is being blamed for it- it's a massive stretch to suggest that she could be responsible, as well as being callous. If she had herself being waving a gun about, that would be different; it would have provided justification for Ebony Jemison drawing her gun. The fact that the actual shooter isn't getting punished for the baby's death (there is no mention at all of any charges for the injuries to Marshae Jones) makes it all the more preposterous; if Jemison isn't culpable, how can Jones be?
Some people in America think that abortion laws may have something to do with the apparent zeal to punish the mother of the child, but naturally that has been denied. But if not that, then what is the explanation? That someone has to pay for the death, even if they are blatantly not nearly as responsible as the shooter? Maybe the gun culture is so strong in America that one should expect to be shot over heated words, and that therefore anyone causing the least displeasure to a gun carrier is responsible for the carrier's actions
.
This is insane. Two women, one pregnant, get into an argument about the unborn child's father. The expectant mother- Marshae Jones- is shot in the stomach by Ebony Jemison, later resulting in the miscarriage of the baby (I'm not certain from the article whether the baby is known to have died instantly or hours/days later; I think probably it was later on, judging by the wording). Jemison was charged with manslaughter (of the baby), but a grand jury failed to indict her (does this mean the jury couldn't decide whether she should even face a court case? I am not familiar with the US terminology). Now here comes the insane bit; the mother herself has been charged on the basis that she began the argument.
I don't care if she started the argument or not, you can't say she is responsible for a shooting just because she began an argument. Of course it is particularly perverse that she lost her baby and is being blamed for it- it's a massive stretch to suggest that she could be responsible, as well as being callous. If she had herself being waving a gun about, that would be different; it would have provided justification for Ebony Jemison drawing her gun. The fact that the actual shooter isn't getting punished for the baby's death (there is no mention at all of any charges for the injuries to Marshae Jones) makes it all the more preposterous; if Jemison isn't culpable, how can Jones be?
Some people in America think that abortion laws may have something to do with the apparent zeal to punish the mother of the child, but naturally that has been denied. But if not that, then what is the explanation? That someone has to pay for the death, even if they are blatantly not nearly as responsible as the shooter? Maybe the gun culture is so strong in America that one should expect to be shot over heated words, and that therefore anyone causing the least displeasure to a gun carrier is responsible for the carrier's actions
.
It's my understanding that the shooter was arrested and was going to be the one who faced charges, but then it came out that she was acting in self-defense. The short thing I saw regarding the situation implied that it wasn't an argument, but that the pregnant woman was actively assaulting the shooter, who defended herself from physical violence with a gun. So it's not just gun rights people having a sperg fest at the expense of all else.
Oh thanks; strange that the BBC article (and one it linked to) failed to mention that important point at all, but I shouldn't be surprised by that. I find the media in general can be frustratingly vague and even misleading when describing incidents. That certainly explains why the shooter wasn't convicted and that the mother has been charged.
Here's another link.
But then, this is Alabama we're talking about. I'm not surprised that things appear to be ass-backwards.
Yep.DanAngleland said:
If the mother attacked the other woman, that's a crime, but IMHO charging her with manslaughter for the death of the baby doesn't make any sense. She didn't kill the baby, the other lady did, and if the other lady acted in self-defense and was found to have not committed a crime, then no one should be charged in connection with the baby's death, right? The mother should be charged with assault, or some variation thereof, for starting the fight.DanAngleland said:
But then, this is Alabama we're talking about. I'm not surprised that things appear to be ass-backwards.
The BBC aticle states: "Police also alleged that Ms Jemison was forced to defend herself from Ms Jones."DanAngleland said:
I noticed Jones was able to post a bond of $50K. So if it's a wealthy'ish woman, they get better treatment in the judicial system.
Rustling up 50k for bail isn't something only rich people can do. You'd be surprised by how much **** is non-essential if you've got a loved one in jail.
As an American, born and bred, the justice system, economy, political system, culture, and just about everything else in America is ****ed. In a bit drunk right now, had like a bottle of wine per hour for the last four hours apparently, but yeah, my country is in a **** state right now..
Quit sipping your potato juice, pinko.
