|
I hate being *that guy* but quote:Violence is defined by the World Health Organization as "the intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or actual, against oneself, another person, or against a group or community, which either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, death, psychological harm, maldevelopment, or deprivation"
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 11:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 14:07 |
|
|
Because if you just define violence as "physical harm" it leaves out a ton of other really harmful psychological and economic poo poo and lets people get away with things like domestic abuse.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 11:14
|
|
|
ate all the Oreos posted:I hate being *that guy* but hey they were judged by the legal system im feeling pretty good about if there was a crime involving threat of violence that they would be behind bars charged with a pile of poo poo atm
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 11:16
|
|
|
the prosecution didn't even try to charge them with stuff related to that, thus people who know ALOT more than I do about the case decided not to proceque it
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 11:16
|
|
|
bbl boys im going to go nonviolently poo poo in baloogan's bed
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 11:19
|
|
|
tho i will say i did think that violence only refered to acts but now im thinking about violence being acts and implied acts
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 11:18
|
|
|
Miscarriages of justice exist, friend.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 11:18
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Miscarriages of justice exist, friend. just cause you don't like the outcome doesn't make it a miscarrage tho
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 11:19
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:just cause you don't like the outcome doesn't make it a miscarrage tho oj did nothing wrong
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 11:21
|
|
|
im going to nonviolently smoke a lot of goddamn reefer in his bathroom and dook all over his couch and make his landlord pissed off and im going to point an assault rifle in his face and all he can do is just groove in it
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 11:22
|
|
|
hey due to the expanded definition of violence all these posts are being violent and are on the same level as someone literally shooting me@!!!
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 11:21
|
|
|
i'll show up at his house with a big loving gun and force him to listen to pearl jam for a month straight nonviolently
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 11:25
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:just cause you don't like the outcome doesn't make it a miscarrage tho There are plenty of court cases that end in outcomes I don’t like but where I still think the jury made the right call—many drug cases, for example. This jury made a mistake. The prosecution also made mistakes. The defense did a good job. I have no complaints there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 11:24
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:There are plenty of court cases that end in outcomes I don’t like but where I still think the jury made the right call—many drug cases, for example. I don't think hundreds of objections counts as a "good job" even if the outcome was in their favor.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 11:27
|
|
|
ate all the Oreos posted:I don't think hundreds of objections counts as a "good job" even if the outcome was in their favor. sovcit defense tactics are basically to confuse the gently caress outta jurors/judges and they indisputably did a good job of that
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 11:29
|
|
|
the lawer got tazed at the end imo the sysetm was upset about justice prevailing and just wanted to violence (this time, physically, actually violence not the fake kind) the lawer up good
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 11:28
|
|
|
ate all the Oreos posted:I don't think hundreds of objections counts as a "good job" even if the outcome was in their favor. If you don’t get disbarred (or officially censured) or held in contempt, it’s a valid tactic.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 11:30
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:the lawer got tazed at the end imo the sysetm was upset about justice prevailing and just wanted to violence (this time, physically, actually violence not the fake kind) the lawer up good you make that sound like a bad thing Baloogan posted:he was paranoid about the federal guys killing him. and federal guys killed him. paranoia is an irrational fear of something, turns out tarpguy wasn't irrationally afraid. maybe if he was more afraid his rear end would be alive and knee deep in mormon wives right now instead of 6 feet deep
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 14:17
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Miscarriages of justice exist, friend. Someone make the drat Loss joke already
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 17:19
|
|
|
Mavric posted:This really is the larger point, isn't it? Like this isn't' even the first! there was that navada couple who were at the first Bundy get to gether who killed some cops. So the Bundys themselves aren't killing anyone, but they are constantly holding events where they enforce the rhetoric and the most extreme followers comply. yeah if ur like 'they didn't kill anyone' well uh only technically true, dudes associated with the sovcits have been doing murders for a while now
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 18:29
|
|
|
and if you wanna be like 'dudes associated with black lives matter have done murders!!" i will agree w/that but at least be consistent
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 18:42
|
|
|
Baloogan, I like you but pointing a loaded gun at someone isn't nonviolent, it's in fact called brandishing and is a crime. In Oregon it falls under the menacing charge and is a misdemeanor.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 18:45
|
|
|
rudatron posted:https://twitter.com/pattersonphoto/status/792132362331000832 I'm looking forward to when one or more jurors show up at the next big militia event. Or at least juror #4 who seems to have a bright future in conservatism and right wing worldviews.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 19:37
|
|
|
Open carry protests are stupid no matter what color your skin is. With the caveat that if you want to open carry in Ammon's drive way until his wife freaks out and calls the police to complain about intimidation, then that's cool with me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 19:53
|
|
|
I'm on some email lists of the Audubon society in Oregon. The bird folks are livid.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 19:56
|
|
|
WrenP-Complete posted:I'm on some email lists of the Audubon society in Oregon. The bird folks are livid. haha cool. the bird folk are alright by me
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
as far as i know the fun fun fun w/ the audubon society has never been associated w/ ideological murder, unlike the bundy militia dudes
Mia Wasikowska has issued a correction as of 20:02 on Oct 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
Birding seems like the most boring hobby in the world but apparently I'm compatible with those people because we hate all the same bitches.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
Anyway. Is it over? The charges were weird because those are the charges federal prosecutors had access to. So no one was actually charged with vandalism, not even for acts of vandalism that were clearly caught on tape. Are those acts covered by double jeopardy, or is it still possible to charge people for the various crimes and misdemeanors that may have been committed? What about fines or civil remedies? Even if they were 'just camping' and not preventing anyone from going to work, when you trash a campground you get a bill for damages. A peaceful occupation doesn't excuse trashing the place.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 20:26
|
|
|
Facebook Aunt posted:Anyway. Is it over? in Oregon, yes. they may get some civil suits and bleed them monetarily but other then that its over. the bundys and some of their lovely friends are still faceing charges(apperently even more serious ones) in Nevada for the bullshit bundy ranch. Dapper_Swindler has issued a correction as of 20:33 on Oct 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 20:29
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:i unironically don't know what MNWR or "Harney" is Just wanted to quote this to record that Baloogan managed to flood the thread with what boils down to "I really know nothing about what is being discussed but I have strong opinions regarding it."
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 20:38
|
|
|
rudatron posted:https://twitter.com/pattersonphoto/status/792132362331000832 Why was this place chosen for the trial to begin with?
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 20:37
|
|
|
Geostomp posted:Why was this place chosen for the trial to begin with? It's where the relevant court is.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 20:50
|
|
|
Facebook Aunt posted:Anyway. Is it over? I believe Oregon can bring state charges, and there are still the federal charges in Nevada from the 2014 standoff. There was concern after the recent not-guilty verdict that maybe the federal govt's case wasn't that strong and bringing further charges would be useless. Since the jury started speaking to the media they've made it clear they voted not guilty based on some misguided idea they were making a "statement" about the federal govt's failure to substantiate the conspiracy charge. They revealed they didn't understand the evidence for the conspiracy charge, and that they voted not guilty on the other non-conspiracy charges as some sort of protest ie nullification. This might actually be encouraging for the prosecutor's, they just need to figure out how to select a jury and spoon-feed the evidence such that even the average juror understands when the defendants are incredibly guilty.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 21:14
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:It's where the relevant court is. Shawna Cox disagreed with this statement, but I bet she's ok with it now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 21:13
|
|
|
There are still others from the group, including Sean Anderson, awaiting trial in Oregon IIRC
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 21:53
|
|
|
I imagine they will be less willing to plea bargain now that their gold fringe status has been validated
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 21:54
|
|
|
They should have been put to trial by ordeal, specifically having to demonstrate they deserve to be called a "militia": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Army_Physical_Fitness_Test
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 21:56
|
|
|
ate all the Oreos posted:I don't think hundreds of objections counts as a "good job" even if the outcome was in their favor. This is probably a good sign that you don't know much about criminal defense.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 23:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 14:07 |
|
|
Jesus never point a gun at anything you are not willing to destroy. Pointing a loaded gun at someone is an implicit statement that you are willing to kill them and you have the means to do so. This is not complicated.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 23:19
|
|
