This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.5
PTR
10.2.6
News Articles
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Adamsm
/sigh People are idiots.
Post by
557473
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
204878
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Adamsm
I just find it stupidly amusing people think they can slap a copyright on things like that; aren't myths/religious figures/famous story races more or less public domain now a days? Are they gonna start trying to copy right Native American next? /roll eyes
Post by
Adamsm
Jesu Tap Dancing Christo
, people like him need to be castrated and thrown in a dark pit.
Post by
204878
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Adamsm
Aye, saw that comment too...I actually had a different saying but well, got a slight talking to from the mods for using it before heh.
Post by
557473
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Lombax
Just wait until Tera ia released. TOTAL &*!@ING ALL OUT %^&* STORM INCOMING!
Post by
gamerunknown
threaten "The Hobbit" pub in Southampton with legal action for stealing revenue from them by using the name of a few characters in their theme.
As far as I recall, there are like three of five things they need to demonstrate before they can sue, lost revenue is one of them. I really fail to see how they're losing revenue though.
Edit:
SAME DAMN GUY behind it
The guy that planted the bomb was found in Pakistan, the quasi-theocratic country that no Republican president wanted to sacrifice their alliance with.
Wasn't there another guy that flew an aeroplane into the WTC and failed to cause any lasting damage?
Post by
ElhonnaDS
Do you think
this
fits the criteria for a death penalty case?
Synopsis: A 9-year-olf girl, who wasn't supposed to eat chocolate because she had a bladder control issue. She was given a candy bar by a friend on the bus (I think this article says it was for "taking a candy bar," but another one I read specified that it was from a friend. She didn't steal it or take it from her family.) He grandmother and step-mother found out, and as punishment they made her run around the house for 3 hours. During this time, reports say she was begging to stop, and that at one point she was crawling and crying to be allowed to stop, but they didn't let her. The little girl collapsed, and was rushed to the hospital. She was put on life support, and a few days later died when they took her off the ventilator. The cause of death was severe dehydration and very low sodium levels, and they determined that they basically ran her to death.
The state is seeking the death penalty against the grandmother for doing this. The step-mother is being charged with murder, but they are not seeking the death penalty against her (I believe it's because she was not involved the entire time, and it was the grandmother who pushed her until the very end.) The father was oversees, and was not involved in the incident.
Do you think this meets the criteria of a capital murder case? I'm not giving an opinion one way or the other yet, I just want to see what other people think.
EDIT: One thing to note, is that (this is not mentioned in the article, but just a point that I'm wondering about) if this girl had a "bladder control" issue, it could mean that she was even more prone to dehydration and loss of electrolytes, depending on what the specific nature of the problem was. It might not have been the case, but if it was then the women would have had prior knowledge that this was more medically dangerous her than for other children.
Post by
204878
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
557473
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Magician22773
Do you think this fits the criteria for a death penalty case
I saw that and actually had a "WTF?" moment when I read it.
Its tragic what happened to the little girl. And I had wondered since I saw the story what details we didn't know, and the "bladder control" issue is something I had not seen until now.
I don't see where this meets any requirement for a capitol murder case. It barely meets the requirements for murder, as I am sure there intention was not to kill, or even harm the child. It was negligent. It was extreme, especially considering the infraction, but I don't think for a second they ever thought the girl would die.
Honestly, I think it is a case of manslaughter and possible child abuse. I do think they deserve the upper end of punishment for those crimes, and they have to live with the loss of their child / grandchild as well.
What I am afraid will happen, is a jury will see this the same way, and they will walk away free because the DA went for the more sensational charge, rather than the lesser charge that would have been an open and shut case.
Post by
ElhonnaDS
That was kind of my first thought as well- that the DA was probably not going to be able to convict on those charges and the women would end up walking. I do think they need to serve significant jail time- it was most definitely child abuse, child endangerment, some form of either manslaughter or lower count of murder. I just don't think it was murder 1, and if the DA doesn't include the option to convict on the lesser charges, they'll probably end up walking.
It would be a clearer case if the abuse was beating, or starvation, because everyone knows that you can kill someone that way. But dehydration by over-exertion...I don't think that's premeditated murder. It's horrible and cruel, and I think that they need to be harshly punished. But I don't know if I believe they knew you could kill someone that way. I would hate to see these two women get off free because the DA is pressing charges he can't convict on because it's a high profile case.
Post by
MyTie
A 9-year-olf girl ... the cause of death was ... that they basically ran her to death.
Do you think this meets the criteria of a capital murder case?
No
I don't think it meets the criteria for capitol punishment. I don't believe that anything, no matter how heinous, meets the criteria to qualify a governmental entity to take the person's life. As a rule, I don't think that government has the right to decide when a person lives and dies. I used to be pro-death penalty, but after debate on the wowhead forums, the abortion threads changed my mind. It was argued against me that if I wouldn't allow government to kill a foetus, I shouldn't allow government to kill Ted Bundy. While this is a horrible analogy, at the very essence of the matter, the argument is correct. It isn't up to government to determine the right to life. The right to life is inalienably. It cannot be removed from the person. It cannot be made alien to the person by the government. It is the right of a person to have life, and government cannot make that right alien to a person. That is pretty cut and dry.
Post by
Adamsm
Unless they find out that the grandmother had been repeatedly abusing the girl...yeah, it's a manslaughter case but hopefully both of them will end up getting the maximum; being forced to run yourself to death is not a good way to go.
Post by
Skithus
A 9-year-olf girl ... the cause of death was ... that they basically ran her to death.
Do you think this meets the criteria of a capital murder case?
No
I don't think it meets the criteria for capitol punishment. I don't believe that anything, no matter how heinous, meets the criteria to qualify a governmental entity to take the person's life. As a rule, I don't think that government has the right to decide when a person lives and dies. I used to be pro-death penalty, but after debate on the wowhead forums, the abortion threads changed my mind. It was argued against me that if I wouldn't allow government to kill a foetus, I shouldn't allow government to kill Ted Bundy. While this is a horrible analogy, at the very essence of the matter, the argument is correct. It isn't up to government to determine the right to life. The right to life is inalienably. It cannot be removed from the person. It cannot be made alien to the person by the government. It is the right of a person to have life, and government cannot make that right alien to a person. That is pretty cut and dry.
By that logic we shouldn't be able to imprison anyone either, since that would be a violation of their inalienable right to Liberty. And its probably fairly difficult to pursue happiness inside a federal prison.
So if we then consider that a criminal has by actions committed waved his inalienable rights, at least temporarily, Its not much of a stretch to say that the government can kill them also.
EDIT: In addition, it wouldn't really be the government deciding if someone died, but rather a jury of his peers.
Post by
MyTie
By that logic we shouldn't be able to imprison anyone either, since that would be a violation of their inalienable right to Liberty. And its probably fairly difficult to pursue happiness inside a federal prison.
So if we then consider that a criminal has by actions committed waved his inalienable rights, at least temporarily, Its not much of a stretch to say that the government can kill them also.
EDIT: In addition, it wouldn't really be the government deciding if someone died, but rather a jury of his peers.
I don't believe someone in prison has lost all of his liberty, as a person who suffers capitol punishment has lost all of his life. A person in prison should have the liberty of religion, beliefs, his/her own body, etc. Just because a person doesn't have liberty of movement, doesn't mean they have no liberty. I would say that a person should have life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, as long as their actions do not willfully infringe on those rights of others.
Post by
Adamsm
The fact that they are in prison says they did willfully infringe on the rights of others.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.