you've got to be joking. if you can't tell the difference between consensual sex and rape, you are doing something wrong.
All I'm saying is, you weren't there. How do you know it immediately appeared that she was enjoying it and supposedly had her legs wrapped around this other dude?
Yeah, I see what you are trying to do and I'm sure he does too, but you'll be hard pressed to actually get him to admit that since it appears he does not feel that way.
he doesn't feel what way? that is what i am trying to get at. what DOES he feel? how does he rationalize these contradictions?
you've got to be joking. if you can't tell the difference between consensual sex and rape, you are doing something wrong. and in any case, how does this overcome the fact that somebody is PARALYZED becos he was wrong? his buddy says "oops, my bad!" and it's all supposed to be fine?
This almost comes off as laughable to me because in an earlier post I stated that in a basic business law class we studied a case where, yes, it is possible to kill someone and get away with it by basically saying "oops, my bad!"
The guy in the post I was talking about earlier basically killed his roommate's buddy and pleaded an "oops my bad, I thought he was trying to murder my roommate" type case.
You're not in court now. And this isn't a trail. If you have a question or you don't understand then why don't you just ask nicely for clarification instead of hounding or insulting? I reckon if you were in court and you continued on in this vein the judge would find you in contempt anyway.
Should I just lodge "objection" every time you do it? Would that help?
the little pimple can get annoying can't he? but i enjoy it. if this were a courtroom; i would never be asked to make an assumption. only 2 people can actually answer that question and they're not here. he's trying to play with the big boys but his feet can't reach the peddels. instead of learning tactics here; he wants to go cry in a corner. i've never seen a court find anyone in contempt for not answering a question only another person can answer.
it's easy to spot an amateur.
temporary insanity? oh how we will get on our knees and swallow anything said by our loved ones.
his buddy walked in, saw his wife balling another dude, and beat the shit out of the guy. period. anyone who believes his "i thought she was being raped" bullshit is either a fucking idiot, or has never had sex.
and this is my point. if you have broadly worded and flexible lethal force laws, you get this. you get prism (i like how none of you seem to have read or want to discuss her story) and her friend being shot and ols's buddy kicking the shit out of an innocent man becos he couldn't deliver in bed. why? becos such a law encourages people to shoot first and ask questions later. why bother to find out if she was actually being raped (like you couldn't tell by her moaning and wrapping her legs around him) or whether someone is actually stealing or whether there was actually a break-in, when all trigger-happy dirty harry wannabes like joe horn have to do is pull the trigger and tell the jury later that "i swear judge, i thought that fucking whore was being raped" and they're off the hook based on "reasonable belief" there was a crime or "temporary insanity" (aka hot-headed piece of shit loses control).
Who on earth are you talking about now? Who's swallowing anything from their loved ones? The guy was found NOT GUILTY wasn't he? So who's swallowing what? The jury? The judge? The police?
You know, all this supposition you got going on isn't going to help you out.
How the fuck would you or I or OLS or the bloody queen of sheba know for certain what the fuck went through Horn's mind or OLS's buddy's mind or anybody elses? I think you decide FAR TOO EASILY how you think things are and proceed from that point.
In both of these cases as far as I can see both men have acted under the law OR been tried under the law and exonerated. IF you do not like the law then why don't you change it instead of supposing all this stuff onto people that you can't possibly know because you weren't there? I would have thought that keeping your mind open would be a very useful tool to have as a lawyer?
This almost comes off as laughable to me because in an earlier post I stated that in a basic business law class we studied a case where, yes, it is possible to kill someone and get away with it by basically saying "oops, my bad!"
The guy in the post I was talking about earlier basically killed his roommate's buddy and pleaded an "oops my bad, I thought he was trying to murder my roommate" type case.
that is my point. the law should not encourage people to rush in and kill other people without figuring out what is going on first. that is why im opposed to what horn did, what your buddy's roommate did, and what ols's buddy did to his wife's lover. it should NOT be fine to say "oops, im sorry! didnt mean to kill you!"
that is my point. the law should not encourage people to rush in and kill other people without figuring out what is going on first. that is why im opposed to what horn did, what your buddy's roommate did, and what ols's buddy did to his wife's lover. it should NOT be fine to say "oops, im sorry! didnt mean to kill you!"
What would you be saying then if in the roommate case, the roommate just stood by and watched his roommate be murdered if the actions had actually been murder. I'm sure many people would be saying "What the FUCK man!? You were right there when that guy murdered your roommate and you did absolutely nothing!?"
In your world it appears the guy would have to reply with "Oh, um...I'm sorry but I thought maybe you know, they were friends, what with all the punches being thrown...I just didn't want to get in the middle of that and go to jail so instead I stood by as complacent as could be."
My point being, that many times murder and harm to other persons can happen in an instance and sometimes you just don't have time to assess the situation while precious minutes are whittling by.
Who on earth are you talking about now? Who's swallowing anything from their loved ones? The guy was found NOT GUILTY wasn't he? So who's swallowing what? The jury? The judge? The police?
You know, all this supposition you got going on isn't going to help you out.
How the fuck would you or I or OLS or the bloody queen of sheba know for certain what the fuck went through Horn's mind or OLS's buddy's mind or anybody elses? I think you decide FAR TOO EASILY how you think things are and proceed from that point.
In both of these cases as far as I can see both men have acted under the law OR been tried under the law and exonerated. IF you do not like the law then why don't you change it instead of supposing all this stuff onto people that you can't possibly know because you weren't there? I would have thought that keeping your mind open would be a very useful tool to have as a lawyer?
this is precisely what i've been saying. i acknowledged long ago this was the law. i'm saying it's a stupid fucking law with bad outcomes and it should be changed. ols's buddy should be in jail for crippling that guy, horn should be in jail for playing god, and so on and so forth.
the loved one comment referred to you and your boy john wayne.
no, the judge would hold ols in contempt if he did not answer my question with a yes or no.
And I'll repeat it for those in the back row that didn't hear me the first time. :rolleyes:
THIS IS NOT COURT! Sheesh!
Now could everyone please remember when you're speaking with soulsinging that you are on trial and all answers will be yes or no otherwise you'll be in contempt and the judge (this a double gig for you?) will lock you up??? :rolleyes:
What would you be saying then if in the roommate case, the roommate just stood by and watched his roommate be murdered if the actions had actually been murder. I'm sure many people would be saying "What the FUCK man!? You were right there when that guy murdered your roommate and you did absolutely nothing!?"
In your world it appears the guy would have to reply with "Oh, um...I'm sorry but I thought maybe you know, they were friends, what with all the punches being thrown...I just didn't want to get in the middle of that and go to jail so instead I stood by as complacent as could be."
oh, i dont know, how about a "hey, what the hell's going on here?" they were punching each other. his roommate wasn't going to die any second. how about anything ANY sort of action to ascertain the situation before reaching for a fucking baseball bat and bludgeoning someone to death? not like it would have taken more than another second. or maybe stop after one swing. or maybe take a warning swing. anything before jumping right to lethal force.
you've got to be joking. if you can't tell the difference between consensual sex and rape, you are doing something wrong. and in any case, how does this overcome the fact that somebody is PARALYZED becos he was wrong? his buddy says "oops, my bad!" and it's all supposed to be fine?
Plenty of people can't tell the difference between consensual sex and rape. It happens all the time and the courts are full of trials where it's in question.
Law makers can't decide if it was rape, juries can't decide if it was rape, perpertrators can't decide if it was rape AND sometimes EVEN VICTIMS can not tell the difference between consensual sex and rape. Just thought I'd point that out.
This almost comes off as laughable to me because in an earlier post I stated that in a basic business law class we studied a case where, yes, it is possible to kill someone and get away with it by basically saying "oops, my bad!"
The guy in the post I was talking about earlier basically killed his roommate's buddy and pleaded an "oops my bad, I thought he was trying to murder my roommate" type case.
i'm with you sludge. you're my new best friend.
watching a kid try to play lawyer is very entertaining.
the little pimple can get annoying can't he? but i enjoy it. if this were a courtroom; i would never be asked to make an assumption. only 2 people can actually answer that question and they're not here. he's trying to play with the big boys but his feet can't reach the peddels. instead of learning tactics here; he wants to go cry in a corner. i've never seen a court find anyone in contempt for not answering a question only another person can answer.
it's easy to spot an amateur.
Listen. Don't be prodding him and taking cheeky shots either. You're both as bloody bad as each other sometimes. If you don't like each other fine but there's absolutely NO POINT in playing whackamole with each other ad infinitum. And aren't you supposed to be doing something else right now anyway?
What would you be saying then if in the roommate case, the roommate just stood by and watched his roommate be murdered if the actions had actually been murder. I'm sure many people would be saying "What the FUCK man!? You were right there when that guy murdered your roommate and you did absolutely nothing!?"
In your world it appears the guy would have to reply with "Oh, um...I'm sorry but I thought maybe you know, they were friends, what with all the punches being thrown...I just didn't want to get in the middle of that and go to jail so instead I stood by as complacent as could be."
My point being, that many times murder and harm to other persons can happen in an instance and sometimes you just don't have time to assess the situation while precious minutes are whittling by.
Actually I was wondering about that.. why didn't the friend do something after the first swing.. clearly he wouldn't be able to stop the first one but surely the second or third.. do you know what happened between the roommates after the incident?
Plenty of people can't tell the difference between consensual sex and rape. It happens all the time and the courts are full of trials where it's in question.
Law makers can't decide if it was rape, juries can't decide if it was rape, perpertrators can't decide if it was rape AND sometimes EVEN VICTIMS can not tell the difference between consensual sex and rape. Just thought I'd point that out.
and he's missing the point that when he opened the door; there wasn't time to think this through rationally. he immediately acted. and he acted the way he was taught to. you protect your wife and family. a normal person would protect his/her loved ones. you don't take the time to watch and try to decide if she's enjoying it or participating. you act.
oh, i dont know, how about a "hey, what the hell's going on here?" they were punching each other. his roommate wasn't going to die any second. how about anything ANY sort of action to ascertain the situation before reaching for a fucking baseball bat and bludgeoning someone to death? not like it would have taken more than another second. or maybe stop after one swing. or maybe take a warning swing. anything before jumping right to lethal force.
and ruin the element of surprise? :P Yeah, I agree, that would've been a better course of action, but sometimes when violence is happening right in front of you, your rationale might fly out the window and if you are fearing for your life as well I don't think you are going to try and draw attention to yourself.
this is precisely what i've been saying. i acknowledged long ago this was the law. i'm saying it's a stupid fucking law with bad outcomes and it should be changed. ols's buddy should be in jail for crippling that guy, horn should be in jail for playing god, and so on and so forth.
the loved one comment referred to you and your boy john wayne.
I don't think that anyone else is disregarding the law here either. Whether it's a good law or a bad law HOW ON EARTH is turning the whole thread into a vendetta match going to change a bloody thing?
It's not enough to just change the law because you think it's unsuitable, ineffectual or a "stupid fucking law". If you don't change the way people THINK then it will keep happening only there'll be even MORE PEOPLE in gaol or dead or maimed.
And the loved one comment was way off base. Because Sludge Factory seems to be understanding where the rest of us are coming from so unless he/she is having a secret affair that I don't know about I'd say that your reasoning is obviously flawed to others also.
I see absolutely NO benefit in vilification. These things have happened and we all need to learn as much as we can from ALL the people involved and try to UNDERSTAND the actions and motivations of ALL the people involved. Otherwise we are just doomed to continue repeating the same mistakes.
Actually I was wondering about that.. why didn't the friend do something after the first swing.. clearly he wouldn't be able to stop the first one but surely the second or third.. do you know what happened between the roommates after the incident?
Unfortunately, I don't know what happened after the incident. The book we used in class was very dry and just basically outlined certain cases. Some of the more important cases in history it would have extra blurbs on, but not this one. I wish I could remember the names of the people involved because then I could look it up to figure more out. I suppose I could try contacting my old professor given he still works at the university.
and he's missing the point that when he opened the door; there wasn't time to think this through rationally. he immediately acted. and he acted the way he was taught to. you protect your wife and family. a normal person would protect his/her loved ones. you don't take the time to watch and try to decide if she's enjoying it or participating. you act.
This would be fine and dandy if you hadn't already posted that you felt partially responsible because you let him off early from work to go make his wife a surprise dinner as she was supposed to be at work. You can cover for your friend all you want, I dig that. But don't say he was justified. I'm sure his suspicions were raised before that day, and were simply confirmed when he saw what was happening. I would have responded in the same way if I walked in on my girl banging some guy, but wouldn't cry the "I thought she was being raped by my friend Bill even though she was supposed to be at work" defense and try to pull it off with a straight face.
"The leads are weak!"
"The leads are weak? Fuckin' leads are weak? You're Weak! I've Been in this business 15 years"
It's not enough to just change the law because you think it's unsuitable, ineffectual or a "stupid fucking law". If you don't change the way people THINK then it will keep happening only there'll be even MORE PEOPLE in gaol or dead or maimed.
Otherwise we are just doomed to continue repeating the same mistakes.
I know this wasn't directed at me, but this is the angle that soulsinging and I are going at (albeit using different methods). If people THINK that this is acceptable behavior (which a lot on here seem to do) then this will continue to happen, and to me that is beyond appalling.
"The leads are weak!"
"The leads are weak? Fuckin' leads are weak? You're Weak! I've Been in this business 15 years"
and he's missing the point that when he opened the door; there wasn't time to think this through rationally. he immediately acted. and he acted the way he was taught to. you protect your wife and family. a normal person would protect his/her loved ones. you don't take the time to watch and try to decide if she's enjoying it or participating. you act.
I agree. People DO do things instantaneously in a shock or fright situation that they would never normally do under other circumstances. It's the fight/flight response and we all have it and use it. And because of it we respond differently to different situations all the time. EVEN if confronted with a similar incident twice we might respond the same or differently. Ryan could explain it much better than me but it's well documented. AND when it kicks in we have no control over it really.
Obviously in this case if Greg did go free then all the evidence was collected and presented to a jury and ultimately their feeling was that he acted without forethought. Or they couldn't find him guilty of malicious intent.
A horrible thing that he did yes. Planned and executed no.
this is precisely what i've been saying. i acknowledged long ago this was the law. i'm saying it's a stupid fucking law with bad outcomes and it should be changed. ols's buddy should be in jail for crippling that guy, horn should be in jail for playing god, and so on and so forth.
the loved one comment referred to you and your boy john wayne.
we have the right to protect ourselves. you will never change that. if the government removes the right to protect ourselves; THEY must take the responsability of protecting us. if they could protect us; there wouldn't be crime. if they could protect us; they would have been at horns neighbours house BEFORE the perps broke in.
why does that law exist? because the police admitt they cannot protect us.
I agree. People DO do things instantaneously in a shock or fright situation that they would never normally do under other circumstances. It's the fight/flight response and we all have it and use it. And because of it we respond differently to different situations all the time. EVEN if confronted with a similar incident twice we might respond the same or differently. Ryan could explain it much better than me but it's well documented. AND when it kicks in we have no control over it really.
Obviously in this case if Greg did go free then all the evidence was collected and presented to a jury and ultimately their feeling was that he acted without forethought. Or they couldn't find him guilty of malicious intent.
A horrible thing that he did yes. Planned and executed no.
I'm glad you brought up the intent thing. That was the one thing hammered into my head that if you can't prove that there was malicious intent you will usually be hard pressed to prove someone guilty.
I know this wasn't directed at me, but this is the angle that soulsinging and I are going at (albeit using different methods). If people THINK that this is acceptable behavior (which a lot on here seem to do) then this will continue to happen, and to me that is beyond appalling.
Ok. I understand what you're saying mookie and I understand that is the angle that you and soulsinging are coming at if from but I'm not sure that all is what is seems. AND as I mentioned earlier (either here or in another thread) browbeating people or ridiculing them for their views if you don't agree with them does nothing more than entrench the attitude further. If they feel they're under attack they batten down the hatches and hang onto their ideas and opinions even harder. NOW how on earth is that going to get us the outcomes we would want?
I would suggest that the best thing you can do in any situation is try to understand the point of view, the motivations and the behaviours of EACH and EVERY person in that situation. Simply deciding that this is wrong and you did it, therefor you should be hung, drawn and quartered it does nothing to solve the situation.
I'm glad you brought up the intent thing. That was the one thing hammered into my head that if you can't prove that there was malicious intent you will usually be hard pressed to prove someone guilty.
And even though seemingly this might equate to someone "getting off scott free" in some cases I think it's far better that the law is there and can be utilized when it's needed. Because as what happened with your friend (?) I mean he would already be completely devestated by what happened, I really can't see what purpose it would serve for him to be incarcerated for it as well. It's not like it would bring back the guy he killed OR that he would learn anything from the prison experience that would help him develop remorse. I would say he's already completely remorseful, confused, devestated, depressed, a whole rollercoaster of emotions. It wouldn't help the friend that was there for the whole thing and was the catalyst for the event, it won't help the deceased's family. I don't see it helping at all.
So yes, I think this law can be manipulated and probably has been, but it's a law and lawyers do that all the time. But I'd rather it existed than not.
This would be fine and dandy if you hadn't already posted that you felt partially responsible because you let him off early from work to go make his wife a surprise dinner as she was supposed to be at work. You can cover for your friend all you want, I dig that. But don't say he was justified. I'm sure his suspicions were raised before that day, and were simply confirmed when he saw what was happening. I would have responded in the same way if I walked in on my girl banging some guy, but wouldn't cry the "I thought she was being raped by my friend Bill even though she was supposed to be at work" defense and try to pull it off with a straight face.
first of all; everyone has that instinct. the instinct to protect yourself is inherent. (where the hell is ryan when we need him?) i and my family was a part of his family. i saw no clues; he saw no clues; and when you're not looking for clues; you deffinately won't see them. greg never said he thought she was being raped. the judge did. in his instructions to the jury. fyi; he never saw bill before that day. greg walked into court and told exactly what happened. he saw someone on his wife and he attacked. the judge understood (maybe he caught his wife with someone; who knows).
the fact remains that we have a right to protect ourselves and our loved ones.
if you don't like it; move to canada.
first of all; everyone has that instinct. the instinct to protect yourself is inherent. (where the hell is ryan when we need him?) i and my family was a part of his family. i saw no clues; he saw no clues; and when you're not looking for clues; you deffinately won't see them. greg never said he thought she was being raped. the judge did. in his instructions to the jury. fyi; he never saw bill before that day. greg walked into court and told exactly what happened. he saw someone on his wife and he attacked. the judge understood (maybe he caught his wife with someone; who knows).
the fact remains that we have a right to protect ourselves and our loved ones.
if you don't like it; move to canada.
i have to feed my critters. brb.
I suppose that it is sometimes like how parents are usually the last ones to find out their kids are involved with drugs or other such shady extracurricular activities.
I suppose that it is sometimes like how parents are usually the last ones to find out their kids are involved with drugs or other such shady extracurricular activities.
not in the town i grew up in. if i farted at the beach; my parents knew it before i got home. that's the responsability to community i always talk about but nobody seems to know what i'm talking about.
what puzzles me; it that after around 300 posts; nobody has shown any sympathy for those who were robbed. i'm sure someone here has to have been a victim of a burglery. you feel violated; afraid to be in your own home; unsafe in your home; and it takes years for that feeling to go away.
the other thing is everyone came to defend the perps. were they lifetime criminals? did they ever kill someone in a home invasion? did hon do a service to the community by stopping their crime spree?
Whew, just read this whole thread. Here is my take (opinion) on the situation. While I understand Horn's frustration over the burglary, I feel that he should have listen to the dispatcher and stayed inside his home. He did a good thing calling in the burglary, but made a mistake when he went outside to take matters into his own hands. His life was not in danger, esp if he stayed inside his house. It was NOT his property. In my opinion, he was angry that these perpetrators may have potentially gotten away and he wasn't going to let that happen. Now, had this been HIS house, I would feel differently, everyone has every right to protect their person or property, although personally, as long as my person (and loved ones) are not in danger, I would NOT take a life over property. What if he had shot some of the cops out of uniform that arrived on the scene? The dispatcher was obviously worried about this. The thing is, as much as we would like to sometimes, we can NOT take the law into our own hands.
When I lived in Denver, my husband got locked out of the house. I was at work. He proceeded to enter our house through the basement window. I remember my neighbor, who luckily knew us, laughing about it. But he was the ONLY neighbor we knew. I thank God Horn was not my neighbor. Also, Horn is going to have to live with this and I feel for him. It wasn't worth it, imo. I also realize that decisions are made in the 'heat of the moment' and that should be taken in consideration. But no one should be applauding this. This would be a different situation if he, his family, or his neighbors (if they were home and threatened) were in immediate danger.
The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance,
but the illusion of knowledge.
~Daniel Boorstin
Only a life lived for others is worth living.
~Albert Einstein
Whew, just read this whole thread. Here is my take (opinion) on the situation. While I understand Horn's frustration over the burglary, I feel that he should have listen to the dispatcher and stayed inside his home. He did a good thing calling in the burglary, but made a mistake when he went outside to take matters into his own hands. His life was not in danger, esp if he stayed inside his house. It was NOT his property. In my opinion, he was angry that these perpetrators may have potentially gotten away and he wasn't going to let that happen. Now, had this been HIS house, I would feel differently, everyone has every right to protect their person or property, although personally, as long as my person (and loved ones) are not in danger, I would NOT take a life over property. What if he had shot some of the cops out of uniform that arrived on the scene? The dispatcher was obviously worried about this. The thing is, as much as we would like to sometimes, we can NOT take the law into our own hands.
When I lived in Denver, my husband got locked out of the house. I was at work. He proceeded to enter our house through the basement window. I remember my neighbor, who luckily knew us, laughing about it. But he was the ONLY neighbor we knew. I thank God Horn was not my neighbor. Also, Horn is going to have to live with this and I feel for him. It wasn't worth it, imo. I also realize that decisions are made in the 'heat of the moment' and that should be taken in consideration. But no one should be applauding this. This would be a different situation if he, his family, or his neighbors (if they were home and threatened) were in immediate danger.
Yet another voice of reason.
"The leads are weak!"
"The leads are weak? Fuckin' leads are weak? You're Weak! I've Been in this business 15 years"
Comments
All I'm saying is, you weren't there. How do you know it immediately appeared that she was enjoying it and supposedly had her legs wrapped around this other dude?
he doesn't feel what way? that is what i am trying to get at. what DOES he feel? how does he rationalize these contradictions?
This almost comes off as laughable to me because in an earlier post I stated that in a basic business law class we studied a case where, yes, it is possible to kill someone and get away with it by basically saying "oops, my bad!"
The guy in the post I was talking about earlier basically killed his roommate's buddy and pleaded an "oops my bad, I thought he was trying to murder my roommate" type case.
the little pimple can get annoying can't he? but i enjoy it. if this were a courtroom; i would never be asked to make an assumption. only 2 people can actually answer that question and they're not here. he's trying to play with the big boys but his feet can't reach the peddels. instead of learning tactics here; he wants to go cry in a corner. i've never seen a court find anyone in contempt for not answering a question only another person can answer.
it's easy to spot an amateur.
Who on earth are you talking about now? Who's swallowing anything from their loved ones? The guy was found NOT GUILTY wasn't he? So who's swallowing what? The jury? The judge? The police?
You know, all this supposition you got going on isn't going to help you out.
How the fuck would you or I or OLS or the bloody queen of sheba know for certain what the fuck went through Horn's mind or OLS's buddy's mind or anybody elses? I think you decide FAR TOO EASILY how you think things are and proceed from that point.
In both of these cases as far as I can see both men have acted under the law OR been tried under the law and exonerated. IF you do not like the law then why don't you change it instead of supposing all this stuff onto people that you can't possibly know because you weren't there? I would have thought that keeping your mind open would be a very useful tool to have as a lawyer?
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
that is my point. the law should not encourage people to rush in and kill other people without figuring out what is going on first. that is why im opposed to what horn did, what your buddy's roommate did, and what ols's buddy did to his wife's lover. it should NOT be fine to say "oops, im sorry! didnt mean to kill you!"
What would you be saying then if in the roommate case, the roommate just stood by and watched his roommate be murdered if the actions had actually been murder. I'm sure many people would be saying "What the FUCK man!? You were right there when that guy murdered your roommate and you did absolutely nothing!?"
In your world it appears the guy would have to reply with "Oh, um...I'm sorry but I thought maybe you know, they were friends, what with all the punches being thrown...I just didn't want to get in the middle of that and go to jail so instead I stood by as complacent as could be."
My point being, that many times murder and harm to other persons can happen in an instance and sometimes you just don't have time to assess the situation while precious minutes are whittling by.
this is precisely what i've been saying. i acknowledged long ago this was the law. i'm saying it's a stupid fucking law with bad outcomes and it should be changed. ols's buddy should be in jail for crippling that guy, horn should be in jail for playing god, and so on and so forth.
the loved one comment referred to you and your boy john wayne.
And I'll repeat it for those in the back row that didn't hear me the first time. :rolleyes:
THIS IS NOT COURT! Sheesh!
Now could everyone please remember when you're speaking with soulsinging that you are on trial and all answers will be yes or no otherwise you'll be in contempt and the judge (this a double gig for you?) will lock you up??? :rolleyes:
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
oh, i dont know, how about a "hey, what the hell's going on here?" they were punching each other. his roommate wasn't going to die any second. how about anything ANY sort of action to ascertain the situation before reaching for a fucking baseball bat and bludgeoning someone to death? not like it would have taken more than another second. or maybe stop after one swing. or maybe take a warning swing. anything before jumping right to lethal force.
Plenty of people can't tell the difference between consensual sex and rape. It happens all the time and the courts are full of trials where it's in question.
Law makers can't decide if it was rape, juries can't decide if it was rape, perpertrators can't decide if it was rape AND sometimes EVEN VICTIMS can not tell the difference between consensual sex and rape. Just thought I'd point that out.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
i'm with you sludge. you're my new best friend.
watching a kid try to play lawyer is very entertaining.
Listen. Don't be prodding him and taking cheeky shots either. You're both as bloody bad as each other sometimes. If you don't like each other fine but there's absolutely NO POINT in playing whackamole with each other ad infinitum. And aren't you supposed to be doing something else right now anyway?
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
Actually I was wondering about that.. why didn't the friend do something after the first swing.. clearly he wouldn't be able to stop the first one but surely the second or third.. do you know what happened between the roommates after the incident?
and he's missing the point that when he opened the door; there wasn't time to think this through rationally. he immediately acted. and he acted the way he was taught to. you protect your wife and family. a normal person would protect his/her loved ones. you don't take the time to watch and try to decide if she's enjoying it or participating. you act.
and ruin the element of surprise? :P Yeah, I agree, that would've been a better course of action, but sometimes when violence is happening right in front of you, your rationale might fly out the window and if you are fearing for your life as well I don't think you are going to try and draw attention to yourself.
I don't think that anyone else is disregarding the law here either. Whether it's a good law or a bad law HOW ON EARTH is turning the whole thread into a vendetta match going to change a bloody thing?
It's not enough to just change the law because you think it's unsuitable, ineffectual or a "stupid fucking law". If you don't change the way people THINK then it will keep happening only there'll be even MORE PEOPLE in gaol or dead or maimed.
And the loved one comment was way off base. Because Sludge Factory seems to be understanding where the rest of us are coming from so unless he/she is having a secret affair that I don't know about I'd say that your reasoning is obviously flawed to others also.
I see absolutely NO benefit in vilification. These things have happened and we all need to learn as much as we can from ALL the people involved and try to UNDERSTAND the actions and motivations of ALL the people involved. Otherwise we are just doomed to continue repeating the same mistakes.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
Unfortunately, I don't know what happened after the incident. The book we used in class was very dry and just basically outlined certain cases. Some of the more important cases in history it would have extra blurbs on, but not this one. I wish I could remember the names of the people involved because then I could look it up to figure more out. I suppose I could try contacting my old professor given he still works at the university.
This would be fine and dandy if you hadn't already posted that you felt partially responsible because you let him off early from work to go make his wife a surprise dinner as she was supposed to be at work. You can cover for your friend all you want, I dig that. But don't say he was justified. I'm sure his suspicions were raised before that day, and were simply confirmed when he saw what was happening. I would have responded in the same way if I walked in on my girl banging some guy, but wouldn't cry the "I thought she was being raped by my friend Bill even though she was supposed to be at work" defense and try to pull it off with a straight face.
"The leads are weak? Fuckin' leads are weak? You're Weak! I've Been in this business 15 years"
"What's your name?"
"FUCK YOU! THAT"S MY NAME!"
I know this wasn't directed at me, but this is the angle that soulsinging and I are going at (albeit using different methods). If people THINK that this is acceptable behavior (which a lot on here seem to do) then this will continue to happen, and to me that is beyond appalling.
"The leads are weak? Fuckin' leads are weak? You're Weak! I've Been in this business 15 years"
"What's your name?"
"FUCK YOU! THAT"S MY NAME!"
I agree. People DO do things instantaneously in a shock or fright situation that they would never normally do under other circumstances. It's the fight/flight response and we all have it and use it. And because of it we respond differently to different situations all the time. EVEN if confronted with a similar incident twice we might respond the same or differently. Ryan could explain it much better than me but it's well documented. AND when it kicks in we have no control over it really.
Obviously in this case if Greg did go free then all the evidence was collected and presented to a jury and ultimately their feeling was that he acted without forethought. Or they couldn't find him guilty of malicious intent.
A horrible thing that he did yes. Planned and executed no.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
we have the right to protect ourselves. you will never change that. if the government removes the right to protect ourselves; THEY must take the responsability of protecting us. if they could protect us; there wouldn't be crime. if they could protect us; they would have been at horns neighbours house BEFORE the perps broke in.
why does that law exist? because the police admitt they cannot protect us.
I'm glad you brought up the intent thing. That was the one thing hammered into my head that if you can't prove that there was malicious intent you will usually be hard pressed to prove someone guilty.
Ok. I understand what you're saying mookie and I understand that is the angle that you and soulsinging are coming at if from but I'm not sure that all is what is seems. AND as I mentioned earlier (either here or in another thread) browbeating people or ridiculing them for their views if you don't agree with them does nothing more than entrench the attitude further. If they feel they're under attack they batten down the hatches and hang onto their ideas and opinions even harder. NOW how on earth is that going to get us the outcomes we would want?
I would suggest that the best thing you can do in any situation is try to understand the point of view, the motivations and the behaviours of EACH and EVERY person in that situation. Simply deciding that this is wrong and you did it, therefor you should be hung, drawn and quartered it does nothing to solve the situation.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
So yes, I think this law can be manipulated and probably has been, but it's a law and lawyers do that all the time. But I'd rather it existed than not.
*~You're IT Bert!~*
Hold on to the thread
The currents will shift
first of all; everyone has that instinct. the instinct to protect yourself is inherent. (where the hell is ryan when we need him?) i and my family was a part of his family. i saw no clues; he saw no clues; and when you're not looking for clues; you deffinately won't see them. greg never said he thought she was being raped. the judge did. in his instructions to the jury. fyi; he never saw bill before that day. greg walked into court and told exactly what happened. he saw someone on his wife and he attacked. the judge understood (maybe he caught his wife with someone; who knows).
the fact remains that we have a right to protect ourselves and our loved ones.
if you don't like it; move to canada.
i have to feed my critters. brb.
I suppose that it is sometimes like how parents are usually the last ones to find out their kids are involved with drugs or other such shady extracurricular activities.
not in the town i grew up in. if i farted at the beach; my parents knew it before i got home. that's the responsability to community i always talk about but nobody seems to know what i'm talking about.
what puzzles me; it that after around 300 posts; nobody has shown any sympathy for those who were robbed. i'm sure someone here has to have been a victim of a burglery. you feel violated; afraid to be in your own home; unsafe in your home; and it takes years for that feeling to go away.
the other thing is everyone came to defend the perps. were they lifetime criminals? did they ever kill someone in a home invasion? did hon do a service to the community by stopping their crime spree?
When I lived in Denver, my husband got locked out of the house. I was at work. He proceeded to enter our house through the basement window. I remember my neighbor, who luckily knew us, laughing about it. But he was the ONLY neighbor we knew. I thank God Horn was not my neighbor. Also, Horn is going to have to live with this and I feel for him. It wasn't worth it, imo. I also realize that decisions are made in the 'heat of the moment' and that should be taken in consideration. But no one should be applauding this. This would be a different situation if he, his family, or his neighbors (if they were home and threatened) were in immediate danger.
but the illusion of knowledge.
~Daniel Boorstin
Only a life lived for others is worth living.
~Albert Einstein
Yet another voice of reason.
"The leads are weak? Fuckin' leads are weak? You're Weak! I've Been in this business 15 years"
"What's your name?"
"FUCK YOU! THAT"S MY NAME!"