+- +-

+- You

Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
 
 
 
Forgot your password?

+- Site Data

Members
Total Members: 87
Latest: brewski
New This Month: 2
New This Week: 1
New Today: 1
Stats
Total Posts: 112779
Total Topics: 4374
Most Online Today: 5
Most Online Ever: 55
(April 18, 2016, 06:09:38 pm)
Users Online
Members: 0
Guests: 1
Total: 1

Poll

Should this girl be convicted of manslaughter?

Guilty
Not Guilty

Author Topic: Let's talk about this court case  (Read 439 times)

cupcake

  • Alfred Hitchcock
  • **********
  • Posts: 9419
  • Hello
  • Location: Bryan Singer's lap
Re: Let's talk about this court case
« Reply #40 on: June 18, 2017, 01:02:50 am »
Also, let's be real for a second.  This case is an extreme in the sense this girl was actively telling a man and coercing him to kill himself.  She even told him to go back and finish killing himself.  This isn't a typical case of a person telling someone to commit suicide and then that person commits suicide or bullying someone into suicide.  This girl actively held this guy up to it even telling him to get back in the car and used his death for her own self interest.  She deserves to be locked up.

No. As yet another victim of authoritarian injustice, she deserves my deepest sympathies.

Having a 8pm curfew doesn't constitute authoritarian injustice, Graham.

Makes more sense than calling a text message a murder weapon, Terf.

Hey, if you hire a hitman, you're not a murderer!!! At least in Diego's world.  After all, you only told a person how to kill a man.  Not like you are in any way culpable of a crime.  Same goes for mob bosses putting a hit on a person.  Phew.  Glad I live in Graham Vertia.  I feel so safe.

Gee, I'm pretty sure that we have laws against paying someone to kill someone else, which is totally fair. Makes sense, given that in such a situation, there's an actual murderer and a murder weapon. But suicide is considered to be the responsibility of the person committing suicide, not anyone around them. I suppose teens these days get their brains saturated by retarded shit like 13 Reasons Why, which unfairly shifts the blame away from the person who committed suicide. I just never thought that such idiotic thinking could reach you, the third-smartest person on the Oasis (after Neville and Refn in Treet).

Think about this: if the girl is guilty of manslaughter, that makes her a murderer. If the girl is a murderer, that means a murder was committed. But a murder was not committed. The death was a suicide. A death cannot be both a suicide and a murder, therefore, the girl is not a murderer and did not commit manslaughter.

It's almost like murder and suicide are two different things... wow, what a concept.

Here's where I disagree actually.  You say that words shouldn't be considered a murder weapon, but all you did was tell a hitman to kill person.  The end result is the same.  The difference being that the girl in this case conspired with the victim. A person is dead.  Sometimes there's a person at fault.  Sometimes there isn't.  In this case, two people are at fault.  You are shifting the blame entirely on the guy who is obviously suffering from depression and isn't in an emotionally strong state while also seemingly giving the girl a pass on her words of encouragement.

Also, wait... All sarcasm aside there is actually something that is really wrong with your way of reasoning suicide.  You say that the fault solely lies on the person at hand completely ignoring the fact that there are people out there with extreme depression and mental illness and certain outside factors aren't a cause.  Idk what the fuck 13 Reasons Why stands for and don't care but a person can be pushed to their edge and can commit suicide and yes, bullies need to be held accountable.  Jail time?  I don't think so.  Yes, the victim should also be held accountable in their own terms, but it is not like the others were helping.  In fact, they probably made the situation much worse.
goodbye!

Tut

  • God-King
  • Paul Thomas Anderson
  • **********
  • Posts: 6690
  • It's all over now, baby blue...
  • Location: Nice try, NSA
Re: Let's talk about this court case
« Reply #41 on: June 18, 2017, 01:17:19 am »
Also, let's be real for a second.  This case is an extreme in the sense this girl was actively telling a man and coercing him to kill himself.  She even told him to go back and finish killing himself.  This isn't a typical case of a person telling someone to commit suicide and then that person commits suicide or bullying someone into suicide.  This girl actively held this guy up to it even telling him to get back in the car and used his death for her own self interest.  She deserves to be locked up.

No. As yet another victim of authoritarian injustice, she deserves my deepest sympathies.

Having a 8pm curfew doesn't constitute authoritarian injustice, Graham.

Makes more sense than calling a text message a murder weapon, Terf.

Hey, if you hire a hitman, you're not a murderer!!! At least in Diego's world.  After all, you only told a person how to kill a man.  Not like you are in any way culpable of a crime.  Same goes for mob bosses putting a hit on a person.  Phew.  Glad I live in Graham Vertia.  I feel so safe.

Gee, I'm pretty sure that we have laws against paying someone to kill someone else, which is totally fair. Makes sense, given that in such a situation, there's an actual murderer and a murder weapon. But suicide is considered to be the responsibility of the person committing suicide, not anyone around them. I suppose teens these days get their brains saturated by retarded shit like 13 Reasons Why, which unfairly shifts the blame away from the person who committed suicide. I just never thought that such idiotic thinking could reach you, the third-smartest person on the Oasis (after Neville and Refn in Treet).

Think about this: if the girl is guilty of manslaughter, that makes her a murderer. If the girl is a murderer, that means a murder was committed. But a murder was not committed. The death was a suicide. A death cannot be both a suicide and a murder, therefore, the girl is not a murderer and did not commit manslaughter.

It's almost like murder and suicide are two different things... wow, what a concept.

Here's where I disagree actually.  You say that words shouldn't be considered a murder weapon, but all you did was tell a hitman to kill person.  The end result is the same.  The difference being that the girl in this case conspired with the victim. A person is dead.  Sometimes there's a person at fault.  Sometimes there isn't.  In this case, two people are at fault.  You are shifting the blame entirely on the guy who is obviously suffering from depression and isn't in an emotionally strong state while also seemingly giving the girl a pass on her words of encouragement.

Also, wait... All sarcasm aside there is actually something that is really wrong with your way of reasoning suicide.  You say that the fault solely lies on the person at hand completely ignoring the fact that there are people out there with extreme depression and mental illness and certain outside factors aren't a cause.  Idk what the fuck 13 Reasons Why stands for and don't care but a person can be pushed to their edge and can commit suicide and yes, bullies need to be held accountable.  Jail time?  I don't think so.  Yes, the victim should also be held accountable in their own terms, but it is not like the others were helping.  In fact, they probably made the situation much worse.

It's funny you should bring up the fact that the boy was severely depressed and suffering from mental health issues, because (news flash) the girl was as well. So if he wasn't responsible for his actions in this situation, why is she? Or how about this-- what if everything had transpired the way it did, except he didn't end up going through with killing himself? What then? Would the girl be charged with attempted murder? That's ridiculous.

And no, it's actually you who's doing the blame shifting here. When someone chooses to kill themselves, that's their decision. They are both the killer and the victim. Spreading the blame to the people around them might be okay from a moral perspective depending upon the situation, but from a legal one? It's literally impossible to prove that the girl affected the situation's outcome in any way. He might have gone through with it if it weren't for her. We'll never know.

Now, should she have been required to provide emotional support/assistance? I say again, no. How many times have you walked past a homeless man on the street and not checked to see if he was okay? He could have been dying for all you knew. Does that make you legally culpable for anything that happens to him? No.

Also, come on... I think you know how stupid your hitman analogy is. Hiring a hitman involves a quid pro quo in addition to a verbal command. It also involves a murder, which this case by definition did not.

Tut

  • God-King
  • Paul Thomas Anderson
  • **********
  • Posts: 6690
  • It's all over now, baby blue...
  • Location: Nice try, NSA
Re: Let's talk about this court case
« Reply #42 on: June 18, 2017, 01:29:11 am »
my boi Cutler sounding like Dom Cobb in this thread


Crohn's Boy

  • David Fincher
  • ******
  • Posts: 4280
  • Hello
  • Location: My couch
Re: Let's talk about this court case
« Reply #43 on: June 18, 2017, 01:32:06 am »
If you go back in time and kill a past version of yourself, is it suicide or homicide?
Goodbye!

cupcake

  • Alfred Hitchcock
  • **********
  • Posts: 9419
  • Hello
  • Location: Bryan Singer's lap
Re: Let's talk about this court case
« Reply #44 on: June 18, 2017, 01:38:30 am »


It's funny you should bring up the fact that the boy was severely depressed and suffering from mental health issues, because (news flash) the girl was as well. So if he wasn't responsible for his actions in this situation, why is she? Or how about this-- what if everything had transpired the way it did, except he didn't end up going through with killing himself? What then? Would the girl be charged with attempted murder? That's ridiculous.

And no, it's actually you who's doing the blame shifting here. When someone chooses to kill themselves, that's their decision. They are both the killer and the victim. Spreading the blame to the people around them might be okay from a moral perspective depending upon the situation, but from a legal one? It's literally impossible to prove that the girl affected the situation's outcome in any way. He might have gone through with it if it weren't for her. We'll never know.

Now, should she have been required to provide emotional support/assistance? I say again, no. How many times have you walked past a homeless man on the street and not checked to see if he was okay? He could have been dying for all you knew. Does that make you legally culpable for anything that happens to him? No.

Also, come on... I think you know how stupid your hitman analogy is. Hiring a hitman involves a quid pro quo in addition to a verbal command. It also involves a murder, which this case by definition did not.

Of course not because no one died and there wouldn't be a reasoning for this case.  Also what mental health issue does she suffer?  Sociopathy?  So what is the difference?  He was a victim and she was a predator.

And he almost backed out of it as well but she encouraged him to go back in the car.  I am not shifting blame.  Both parties are accountable.  What the fuck is wrong with you?  I cannot associate with someone who values "free speech" at the cost of a human life. 

And should she have provided emotional assistance? No.  But then again, she coerced him into doing it.  Your homeless man parallel doesn't work because in that case I am unsure.  In this case, she was 100% sure he was dying and did absolutely nothing to prevent it, even listening to him dying.  If you think someone could go through all that and still walk the streets, then that is not justice.
goodbye!

Tut

  • God-King
  • Paul Thomas Anderson
  • **********
  • Posts: 6690
  • It's all over now, baby blue...
  • Location: Nice try, NSA
Re: Let's talk about this court case
« Reply #45 on: June 18, 2017, 01:51:37 am »
Of course not because no one died and there wouldn't be a reasoning for this case.  Also what mental health issue does she suffer?  Sociopathy?  So what is the difference?  He was a victim and she was a predator.

And he almost backed out of it as well but she encouraged him to go back in the car.  I am not shifting blame.  Both parties are accountable.  What the fuck is wrong with you?  I cannot associate with someone who values "free speech" at the cost of a human life. 

And should she have provided emotional assistance? No.  But then again, she coerced him into doing it.  Your homeless man parallel doesn't work because in that case I am unsure.  In this case, she was 100% sure he was dying and did absolutely nothing to prevent it, even listening to him dying.  If you think someone could go through all that and still walk the streets, then that is not justice.

You're letting your emotions get the better of you here. Is it morally right to let this person walk free? Maybe not. But by whose morals? Legislating morality is a tricky path to navigate. It's the ideology of the authoritarian right. What if I think that abortion is morally reprehensible, and that the women and doctors who partake in such procedures should be put to death? Do I get to legislate accordingly then?

What one person considers "morally right" is often legally dubious, and no case proves this as perfectly as this one does. Do I think it's morally right to encourage someone to kill themselves if you know they might actually go through with it? No. At the same time, do I think that this girl should be imprisoned? Absolutely not. You can't legislate against a person's right to do as they please unless they harm another human being. In this case, I do not believe that she brought harm to the guy, because words alone cannot do harm. If they can, they should be considered a weapon, and if words are weapons, they can be controlled through legislation. I don't believe that for a second.

Also...

I cannot associate with someone who values "free speech" at the cost of a human life.

Patrick Henry is rolling in his grave.

cupcake

  • Alfred Hitchcock
  • **********
  • Posts: 9419
  • Hello
  • Location: Bryan Singer's lap
Re: Let's talk about this court case
« Reply #46 on: June 18, 2017, 01:55:44 am »
Boy, you don't want to talk about how words can't hurt...
goodbye!

cupcake

  • Alfred Hitchcock
  • **********
  • Posts: 9419
  • Hello
  • Location: Bryan Singer's lap
Re: Let's talk about this court case
« Reply #47 on: June 18, 2017, 02:00:12 am »
Of course not because no one died and there wouldn't be a reasoning for this case.  Also what mental health issue does she suffer?  Sociopathy?  So what is the difference?  He was a victim and she was a predator.

And he almost backed out of it as well but she encouraged him to go back in the car.  I am not shifting blame.  Both parties are accountable.  What the fuck is wrong with you?  I cannot associate with someone who values "free speech" at the cost of a human life. 

And should she have provided emotional assistance? No.  But then again, she coerced him into doing it.  Your homeless man parallel doesn't work because in that case I am unsure.  In this case, she was 100% sure he was dying and did absolutely nothing to prevent it, even listening to him dying.  If you think someone could go through all that and still walk the streets, then that is not justice.

You're letting your emotions get the better of you here. Is it morally right to let this person walk free? Maybe not. But by whose morals? Legislating morality is a tricky path to navigate. It's the ideology of the authoritarian right. What if I think that abortion is morally reprehensible, and that the women and doctors who partake in such procedures should be put to death? Do I get to legislate accordingly then?

What one person considers "morally right" is often legally dubious, and no case proves this as perfectly as this one does. Do I think it's morally right to encourage someone to kill themselves if you know they might actually go through with it? No. At the same time, do I think that this girl should be imprisoned? Absolutely not. You can't legislate against a person's right to do as they please unless they harm another human being. In this case, I do not believe that she brought harm to the guy, because words alone cannot do harm. If they can, they should be considered a weapon, and if words are weapons, they can be controlled through legislation. I don't believe that for a second.

Also...

I cannot associate with someone who values "free speech" at the cost of a human life.

Patrick Henry is rolling in his grave.
We should encourage our lawmakers to make laws that are morally sound. 

Her words did assist in this man's death though.  Again, he backed out but she encouraged him to get back into the car.  This is the most damning part of the entire case.  Had she backed off, he wouldn't have died.  You shouldn't be able to tell a man about to jump off a building to do so and walk free.
goodbye!

Tut

  • God-King
  • Paul Thomas Anderson
  • **********
  • Posts: 6690
  • It's all over now, baby blue...
  • Location: Nice try, NSA
Re: Let's talk about this court case
« Reply #48 on: June 18, 2017, 02:10:21 am »
Of course not because no one died and there wouldn't be a reasoning for this case.  Also what mental health issue does she suffer?  Sociopathy?  So what is the difference?  He was a victim and she was a predator.

And he almost backed out of it as well but she encouraged him to go back in the car.  I am not shifting blame.  Both parties are accountable.  What the fuck is wrong with you?  I cannot associate with someone who values "free speech" at the cost of a human life. 

And should she have provided emotional assistance? No.  But then again, she coerced him into doing it.  Your homeless man parallel doesn't work because in that case I am unsure.  In this case, she was 100% sure he was dying and did absolutely nothing to prevent it, even listening to him dying.  If you think someone could go through all that and still walk the streets, then that is not justice.

You're letting your emotions get the better of you here. Is it morally right to let this person walk free? Maybe not. But by whose morals? Legislating morality is a tricky path to navigate. It's the ideology of the authoritarian right. What if I think that abortion is morally reprehensible, and that the women and doctors who partake in such procedures should be put to death? Do I get to legislate accordingly then?

What one person considers "morally right" is often legally dubious, and no case proves this as perfectly as this one does. Do I think it's morally right to encourage someone to kill themselves if you know they might actually go through with it? No. At the same time, do I think that this girl should be imprisoned? Absolutely not. You can't legislate against a person's right to do as they please unless they harm another human being. In this case, I do not believe that she brought harm to the guy, because words alone cannot do harm. If they can, they should be considered a weapon, and if words are weapons, they can be controlled through legislation. I don't believe that for a second.

Also...

I cannot associate with someone who values "free speech" at the cost of a human life.

Patrick Henry is rolling in his grave.
We should encourage our lawmakers to make laws that are morally sound. 

Her words did assist in this man's death though.  Again, he backed out but she encouraged him to get back into the car.  This is the most damning part of the entire case.  Had she backed off, he wouldn't have died.  You shouldn't be able to tell a man about to jump off a building to do so and walk free.

No we should not. I absolutely draw the line here. Different people have different definitions of what "morally sound" means. Yet another potential slippery slope.

And again, we have no way of knowing what would've happened had she not been involved. He might have killed himself. Might not have. Having her around might have kept him from killing himself for some time, for all we know. All I know is that as soon as we start legislating to protect fragile people's feelings, our civil liberties are going to disappear faster than you can say "nanny state." If you think I'm being dramatic, the ACLU, one of the greatest institutions in this country, agrees.

This whole court case stems from the cult of victimhood. These are the same people who sue Starbucks because they serve coffee that's "too hot." The parents wanted to blame someone since they felt guilty about not fucking paying attention to what was happening in their kid's life, so they decided to shift the blame to this girl (who admittedly made herself a very easy target). Oh no, look at the poor dead kid! He was mentally ill, so he wasn't responsible for his own actions. Poor little snowflake! Never mind that this girl is also mentally ill-- fuck her!

cupcake

  • Alfred Hitchcock
  • **********
  • Posts: 9419
  • Hello
  • Location: Bryan Singer's lap
Re: Let's talk about this court case
« Reply #49 on: June 18, 2017, 02:17:12 am »
The ACLU supports anything involving free speech.  Supporting Klan rallies and the Confederate Flag.  So of course, they'd be on the opposite side of the spectrum.  I cannot and will not support this idea that a person can coerce another to suicide and get away.  End.
goodbye!

cupcake

  • Alfred Hitchcock
  • **********
  • Posts: 9419
  • Hello
  • Location: Bryan Singer's lap
Re: Let's talk about this court case
« Reply #50 on: June 18, 2017, 02:18:33 am »
Also white people love using the mental illness excuse for monsters lmao.
goodbye!

Tut

  • God-King
  • Paul Thomas Anderson
  • **********
  • Posts: 6690
  • It's all over now, baby blue...
  • Location: Nice try, NSA
Re: Let's talk about this court case
« Reply #51 on: June 18, 2017, 02:28:24 am »
You know, if nothing else, this conversation has made me appreciate the humor of juxtaposition a bit more than before.



Dude, I know she's a cunt but we're arguing for something much bigger than her. The fact that she was prosecuted for something like manslaughter because of her words and only her words is what's worrying.

i have no qualms with that. in fact i like it.  your words carry weight.



That is two different cases, faggot.  This girl knew he would actively kill himself because of her words.  She knew weight behind her words.  Someone making a joke and then a person committing a crime doesn't have the same weight because the person making the joke didn't have intent to have the crime happen.



You shouldn't be able to tell a man about to jump off a building to do so and walk free.



Boy, you don't want to talk about how words can't hurt...

Gold Jeffblum

  • Moderator
  • Ridley Scott
  • ******
  • Posts: 3722
  • ...checkmate.
Re: Let's talk about this court case
« Reply #52 on: June 18, 2017, 02:55:42 pm »
Nasty girl but she has first amendment protection that seems to be being ignored.
Like Like x 1 View List

Tut

  • God-King
  • Paul Thomas Anderson
  • **********
  • Posts: 6690
  • It's all over now, baby blue...
  • Location: Nice try, NSA
Re: Let's talk about this court case
« Reply #53 on: June 18, 2017, 02:56:54 pm »
Nasty girl but she has first amendment protection that seems to be being ignored.


Tho Master Fie

  • God-King
  • Sam Raimi
  • **********
  • Posts: 5408
  • Fear comes in waves
Re: Let's talk about this court case
« Reply #54 on: June 18, 2017, 03:07:14 pm »
The ACLU supports anything involving free speech.  Supporting Klan rallies and the Confederate Flag.  So of course, they'd be on the opposite side of the spectrum.  I cannot and will not support this idea that a person can coerce another to suicide and get away.  End.
I know you like to be controversial for the sake of being controversial, but you're a little too transparent in this case.  Aren't you the guy that's always telling people to kill themselves?

cupcake

  • Alfred Hitchcock
  • **********
  • Posts: 9419
  • Hello
  • Location: Bryan Singer's lap
Re: Let's talk about this court case
« Reply #55 on: June 18, 2017, 03:21:27 pm »
The ACLU supports anything involving free speech.  Supporting Klan rallies and the Confederate Flag.  So of course, they'd be on the opposite side of the spectrum.  I cannot and will not support this idea that a person can coerce another to suicide and get away.  End.
I know you like to be controversial for the sake of being controversial, but you're a little too transparent in this case.  Aren't you the guy that's always telling people to kill themselves?

I am prepared to face God for every "kill yourself" quote of mine. 
goodbye!

cupcake

  • Alfred Hitchcock
  • **********
  • Posts: 9419
  • Hello
  • Location: Bryan Singer's lap
Re: Let's talk about this court case
« Reply #56 on: June 18, 2017, 03:21:59 pm »
The ACLU supports anything involving free speech.  Supporting Klan rallies and the Confederate Flag.  So of course, they'd be on the opposite side of the spectrum.  I cannot and will not support this idea that a person can coerce another to suicide and get away.  End.
I know you like to be controversial for the sake of being controversial, but you're a little too transparent in this case.  Aren't you the guy that's always telling people to kill themselves?

I am prepared to face God for every "kill yourself" quote of mine. 

Which is 0.
goodbye!

Frankie

  • God-King
  • Paul Thomas Anderson
  • **********
  • Posts: 6704
Re: Let's talk about this court case
« Reply #57 on: June 18, 2017, 03:47:01 pm »
The ACLU supports anything involving free speech.  Supporting Klan rallies and the Confederate Flag.  So of course, they'd be on the opposite side of the spectrum.  I cannot and will not support this idea that a person can coerce another to suicide and get away.  End.
I know you like to be controversial for the sake of being controversial, but you're a little too transparent in this case.  Aren't you the guy that's always telling people to kill themselves?

I am prepared to face God for every "kill yourself" quote of mine. 

Which is 0.

Kill yourself.

Gold Jeffblum

  • Moderator
  • Ridley Scott
  • ******
  • Posts: 3722
  • ...checkmate.
Re: Let's talk about this court case
« Reply #58 on: June 18, 2017, 03:55:53 pm »
Nasty girl but she has first amendment protection that seems to be being ignored.


This is changing the subject a little but I have no idea how anyone could find politics boring these days.
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Tut

  • God-King
  • Paul Thomas Anderson
  • **********
  • Posts: 6690
  • It's all over now, baby blue...
  • Location: Nice try, NSA
Re: Let's talk about this court case
« Reply #59 on: June 18, 2017, 04:01:23 pm »
Nasty girl but she has first amendment protection that seems to be being ignored.


This is changing the subject a little but I have no idea how anyone could find politics boring these days.

One of the few positives about the Trump administration is how involved people have become in the political system. Friends of mine who'd always been apathetic about this stuff have really started to care.
Agree Agree x 1 View List

 

+- Hot Threads

The Official Movie Trailer/TV Spot Watching Thread by Robert Neville
October 14, 2018, 05:26:22 pm

THE OFFICIAL MOVIE WATCHING THREAD by JohnBot
October 12, 2018, 01:29:07 am

The Trump Presidency Thread by Robert Neville
October 09, 2018, 05:27:33 pm

2018 Standings by Crohn's Boy
October 07, 2018, 11:13:25 am

Khabib vs. Conor fight by Robert Neville
October 07, 2018, 07:15:48 am

Another reason why SEC is so embarrassing... by The One Who Lurks
October 06, 2018, 07:21:54 pm

What song are you listening to - Part II by Charles Longboat Jr.
September 29, 2018, 09:36:30 pm

2 Fudge 2 Knuckle by Jim Raynor Remastered
September 29, 2018, 03:34:00 pm

Book Thread. What are you reading? by Tut
September 26, 2018, 11:40:42 pm

MWO Movie News, a subsidiary of the Walt Disney Company by Charles Longboat Jr.
September 20, 2018, 07:51:25 pm

Whats your take on movie crowdfunding? by Robert Neville
September 16, 2018, 07:23:03 am

Consensus XXXIII: Netflicks Moovys by Crohn's Boy
September 14, 2018, 04:06:15 pm

THE SCHOOL THREAD! by Tut
September 07, 2018, 04:43:28 pm

Favorite videogame cutscenes by Robert Neville
September 06, 2018, 02:55:25 pm

The US Supreme Court Thread by Charles Longboat Jr.
September 04, 2018, 03:02:07 pm