Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

[Gay Rights] Scott Walker still trying to get fired.

15657585961

Comments

  • tinwhiskerstinwhiskers Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    Elldren wrote: »
    - Being told that its ok to punch a tranny if she didnt reveal her trans status early enough in a dating situation

    ugh

    I remember that thread

    that was not a happy thread

    That was a thread here?


    IIRC, it was in a thread discussing if trans-women(i think I always get confused with trans-X if X is the end state or the start), should disclose to their partners that they used to be men.

  • smeejsmeej Registered User
    edited May 2011
    It doesn't sound like something we want to turn this thread into.

    IT'S A SAD THING THAT YOUR ADVENTURES HAVE ENDED HERE!!
  • lizard eats flieslizard eats flies Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    tinwhiskers: you always refer to the end state. So a trans woman would be someone who transitioned male to female.

    smeej: I agree, we probably dont want to get into it here as it would probably massively derail the thread.

    so here is an article:
    http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2011/05/oregon-two-gay-portland-men-beaten-for.html

    Wtf Portland? really? ugh.

  • TastyfishTastyfish Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    Koshian wrote: »
    http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/local&id=8150010
    It's been nearly a year since Thomas Araguz died fighting a fire at a Wharton egg farm. He is survived by his widow Nikki and his two children. His ex-wife, Heather Delgato is suing to collect hundreds of thousands of dollars in death benefits for the children, alleging that under Texas law, Nikki's marriage to Thomas is void because she was born a man and Texas does not recognize same-sex marriage.

    God fucking damnit, Texas.

    Interestingly enough, here is the first article that talks about the fire. From the same newspage, though not sure if that makes it better or worse.

  • InvisibleInvisible Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    Elldren wrote: »
    SniperGuy wrote: »
    My girlfriend just sent me this: http://www.tennessean.com/article/20110523/NEWS02/110523033/Haslam-reverses-Metro-s-anti-discrimination-law

    This is in my state, but I'm somewhat confused. Did he just make it legal to discriminate against LBGT people?

    No, its much worse than that. It made it illegal to make LGBT discrimination illegal. Basically town/cities not full of cousin fuckers, can no longer say 'you can't discriminate if you do contract work for us'.

    It is working to erase what islands of tolerance exist in this state

    In fact, it's more or less specifically targeting Nashville

    Yep. And I can't give enough credit to the Metro-Nashville council members who supported equal rights and fought against this measure. Particularly Jaime Hollin, who unfortunately isn't seeking another term (he won by 542 to 539 after a special recall election in 2009).

    The whole state government is full of inbred morons, led by an inbred moron, who are doing their best to turn Tennessee into the next Somalia. If they can strip away rights from a group of people, be they gays, teachers, muslims, women, whoever isn't a white, straight, protestant male, they will.

    steam_sig.png
  • DirtyDirtyVagrantDirtyDirtyVagrant Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    You witness an assault like that and do nothing to help? Not even call the cops? You're just as guilty. Fuck that shit so hard. I'm so sick of reading stories about people who don't give a fuck.

    "Little Susie was on fire for nine minutes while twenty onlookers roasted marshmallows."

    That ought to be some fucking jail time. Or a fine. Or SOMETHING.

  • The_SpaniardThe_Spaniard Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    You witness an assault like that and do nothing to help? Not even call the cops? You're just as guilty. Fuck that shit so hard. I'm so sick of reading stories about people who don't give a fuck.

    "Little Susie was on fire for nine minutes while twenty onlookers roasted marshmallows."

    That ought to be some fucking jail time. Or a fine. Or SOMETHING.

    Oh you mean like those two gay guys that were beaten senseless on a busy public street for being gay, while dozens of onlookers watched, not lifting a finger to help. Then the cops that came just shrugged and basically said, "Tough luck, just what happens when you are all gay with your gayness."

    Xbox 360/One Gamertag: SpanWolf - PS3/PS4 Gamertag: Span_Wolf
    3DS: Span_Wolf - 4854-6434-9883/WiiU:Span_Wolf
    Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/Span_Wolf/ - Origin: Span_Wolf
  • DracomicronDracomicron Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    Was this posted? I looked for a few pages, but couldn't find anything.

    MN State Representative John Kriesel (R) bashes fellow Republicans for voting for a gay marriage-preventing amendment.
    “If this was five, six years ago, I probably would have voted yes,” he admitted — but “everything changed,” Kriesel said, after he was wounded in Iraq.

    “It woke me up. It changed me,” he explained. “…Happiness is so hard to find for people. So they find it — they find someone that makes them happy — and we want to say you can be together, you can love that person, but you can’t marry them. That’s wrong. That’s wrong and I disagree with it.”

    “This amendment doesn’t represent what I went to fight for,” Kriesel insisted, before holding up a photo of a gay soldier who was killed in Iraq.

    “I don’t know about you guys, but I cannot look at this family, look at this picture, and say ‘You know what, corporal, you were good enough to fight for your country and give your life, but you were not good enough to marry the person you love.’ I can’t do that. I cannot do that and I won’t do that. If there was a ‘hell no’ button right here, I would press it. That would be the one I would press.”

    The statehouse passed the marriage amendment by a vote of 70-62, with Kriesel being one of the only Republicans to vote against his party.

    Sadly he'll probably get primaried out of office next time around.

    Gary Gygax wrote:
    ''The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don't need any rules.''
  • Regina FongRegina Fong Allons-y, Alonso Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    Was this posted? I looked for a few pages, but couldn't find anything.

    MN State Representative John Kriesel (R) bashes fellow Republicans for voting for a gay marriage-preventing amendment.
    “If this was five, six years ago, I probably would have voted yes,” he admitted — but “everything changed,” Kriesel said, after he was wounded in Iraq.

    “It woke me up. It changed me,” he explained. “…Happiness is so hard to find for people. So they find it — they find someone that makes them happy — and we want to say you can be together, you can love that person, but you can’t marry them. That’s wrong. That’s wrong and I disagree with it.”

    “This amendment doesn’t represent what I went to fight for,” Kriesel insisted, before holding up a photo of a gay soldier who was killed in Iraq.

    “I don’t know about you guys, but I cannot look at this family, look at this picture, and say ‘You know what, corporal, you were good enough to fight for your country and give your life, but you were not good enough to marry the person you love.’ I can’t do that. I cannot do that and I won’t do that. If there was a ‘hell no’ button right here, I would press it. That would be the one I would press.”

    The statehouse passed the marriage amendment by a vote of 70-62, with Kriesel being one of the only Republicans to vote against his party.

    Sadly he'll probably get primaried out of office next time around.


    The Republican party is nothing if not firm in their resolution to weed out boat-rockers, rabble rousers, and individualists from their ranks.

    The upside to this is it makes it very easy to pan them as a group. Because barring a few exceptions (Maine's senators and what not) if you can point at a republican and say "His views aren't completely terrible" then you can also count the days until his own party pulls the plug on his political career.

  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    Was this posted? I looked for a few pages, but couldn't find anything.

    MN State Representative John Kriesel (R) bashes fellow Republicans for voting for a gay marriage-preventing amendment.
    “If this was five, six years ago, I probably would have voted yes,” he admitted — but “everything changed,” Kriesel said, after he was wounded in Iraq.

    “It woke me up. It changed me,” he explained. “…Happiness is so hard to find for people. So they find it — they find someone that makes them happy — and we want to say you can be together, you can love that person, but you can’t marry them. That’s wrong. That’s wrong and I disagree with it.”

    “This amendment doesn’t represent what I went to fight for,” Kriesel insisted, before holding up a photo of a gay soldier who was killed in Iraq.

    “I don’t know about you guys, but I cannot look at this family, look at this picture, and say ‘You know what, corporal, you were good enough to fight for your country and give your life, but you were not good enough to marry the person you love.’ I can’t do that. I cannot do that and I won’t do that. If there was a ‘hell no’ button right here, I would press it. That would be the one I would press.”

    The statehouse passed the marriage amendment by a vote of 70-62, with Kriesel being one of the only Republicans to vote against his party.

    Sadly he'll probably get primaried out of office next time around.


    The Republican party is nothing if not firm in their resolution to weed out boat-rockers, rabble rousers, and individualists from their ranks.

    The upside to this is it makes it very easy to pan them as a group. Because barring a few exceptions (Maine's senators and what not) if you can point at a republican and say "His views aren't completely terrible" then you can also count the days until his own party pulls the plug on his political career.
    Maine's senators talk a good game, and that's about it. The Democrats should have gone for the throat on them long, long ago.

  • Regina FongRegina Fong Allons-y, Alonso Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Was this posted? I looked for a few pages, but couldn't find anything.

    MN State Representative John Kriesel (R) bashes fellow Republicans for voting for a gay marriage-preventing amendment.
    “If this was five, six years ago, I probably would have voted yes,” he admitted — but “everything changed,” Kriesel said, after he was wounded in Iraq.

    “It woke me up. It changed me,” he explained. “…Happiness is so hard to find for people. So they find it — they find someone that makes them happy — and we want to say you can be together, you can love that person, but you can’t marry them. That’s wrong. That’s wrong and I disagree with it.”

    “This amendment doesn’t represent what I went to fight for,” Kriesel insisted, before holding up a photo of a gay soldier who was killed in Iraq.

    “I don’t know about you guys, but I cannot look at this family, look at this picture, and say ‘You know what, corporal, you were good enough to fight for your country and give your life, but you were not good enough to marry the person you love.’ I can’t do that. I cannot do that and I won’t do that. If there was a ‘hell no’ button right here, I would press it. That would be the one I would press.”

    The statehouse passed the marriage amendment by a vote of 70-62, with Kriesel being one of the only Republicans to vote against his party.

    Sadly he'll probably get primaried out of office next time around.


    The Republican party is nothing if not firm in their resolution to weed out boat-rockers, rabble rousers, and individualists from their ranks.

    The upside to this is it makes it very easy to pan them as a group. Because barring a few exceptions (Maine's senators and what not) if you can point at a republican and say "His views aren't completely terrible" then you can also count the days until his own party pulls the plug on his political career.
    Maine's senators talk a good game, and that's about it. The Democrats should have gone for the throat on them long, long ago.

    And here I thought I was damning them with faint praise.

  • Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Harrisonburg, VARegistered User regular
    edited May 2011
  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    She's acting like she'll manage to win it.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Harrisonburg, VARegistered User regular
    edited May 2011
    That's probably to make people think she will so they won't bother voting for her challenger(s).

  • KalTorakKalTorak Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    SniperGuy wrote: »
    My girlfriend just sent me this: http://www.tennessean.com/article/20110523/NEWS02/110523033/Haslam-reverses-Metro-s-anti-discrimination-law

    This is in my state, but I'm somewhat confused. Did he just make it legal to discriminate against LBGT people?

    No, its much worse than that. It made it illegal to make LGBT discrimination illegal. Basically town/cities not full of cousin fuckers, can no longer say 'you can't discriminate if you do contract work for us'.

    How is that any different from the piece of shit that got struck down here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romer_v._Evans

    ?

  • Regina FongRegina Fong Allons-y, Alonso Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    I'd love to see Maine go Democrat in the senate. Hopefully Snowe will lose the primary to some un-electable fascist.

  • ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    I'd love to see Maine go Democrat in the senate. Hopefully Snowe will lose the primary to some un-electable fascist.
    And then run as an independent, and insure that not only does the unelectable fascist lose, but that Maine's Republican Party is divided for years to come.

  • Captain CarrotCaptain Carrot Harrisonburg, VARegistered User regular
    edited May 2011
    She can't. Maine is one of the many states that disallows running for one nomination and then entering the general election under another party's banner, though I believe they do it not explicitly through a "sore loser" law, but having the registration deadlines for the primary and general elections on the same day. If Snowe wants to keep her seat, she gets one chance to decide what affiliation she'll take.

  • Regina FongRegina Fong Allons-y, Alonso Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    She can't. Maine is one of the many states that disallows running for one nomination and then entering the general election under another party's banner, though I believe they do it not explicitly through a "sore loser" law, but having the registration deadlines for the primary and general elections on the same day. If Snowe wants to keep her seat, she gets one chance to decide what affiliation she'll take.

    Maine is more sensible than Connecticut, this is a huge shock to me. Just huge.

    /sarcasm

  • Bobkins FlymoBobkins Flymo Nice day for a Waa WeddingRegistered User, Super Moderator, Moderator mod
    edited May 2011
    You witness an assault like that and do nothing to help? Not even call the cops? You're just as guilty. Fuck that shit so hard. I'm so sick of reading stories about people who don't give a fuck.

    "Little Susie was on fire for nine minutes while twenty onlookers roasted marshmallows."

    That ought to be some fucking jail time. Or a fine. Or SOMETHING.
    Oh you mean like those two gay guys that were beaten senseless on a busy public street for being gay, while dozens of onlookers watched, not lifting a finger to help. Then the cops that came just shrugged and basically said, "Tough luck, just what happens when you are all gay with your gayness."
    Putting yourself in physical danger is generally a bad thing. You don't know which of the people in the crowd are bigots and which aren't. It can lead to a giant brawl or a giant curbstomp. I wouldn't never, ever fault someone for not putting themselves at risk. That's completely understandable in the majority of cases.

    Having said that, if you don't call the cops and/or testify against the assailant(s), you are pretty much scum.

    0SZEg7b.png
  • TurkeyTurkey Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    Rorus Raz wrote: »
    You witness an assault like that and do nothing to help? Not even call the cops? You're just as guilty. Fuck that shit so hard. I'm so sick of reading stories about people who don't give a fuck.

    "Little Susie was on fire for nine minutes while twenty onlookers roasted marshmallows."

    That ought to be some fucking jail time. Or a fine. Or SOMETHING.
    Oh you mean like those two gay guys that were beaten senseless on a busy public street for being gay, while dozens of onlookers watched, not lifting a finger to help. Then the cops that came just shrugged and basically said, "Tough luck, just what happens when you are all gay with your gayness."
    Putting yourself in physical danger is generally a bad thing. You don't know which of the people in the crowd are bigots and which aren't. It can lead to a giant brawl or a giant curbstomp. I wouldn't never, ever fault someone for not putting themselves at risk. That's completely understandable in the majority of cases.

    Having said that, if you don't call the cops and/or testify against the assailant(s), you are pretty much scum.

    I agree. Standing up for the victim is something you should do only if you're pretty sure you can diffuse the situation. Otherwise, just get away and call the cops as soon as you're at a safe distance.

    zkVyf.png
  • DirtyDirtyVagrantDirtyDirtyVagrant Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    Cowardice. And apathy. In their purest forms. I can't fault somebody for not risking their skin, because as you said the situation could get ugly very fast...

    But do you really think people in the crowd would actually step in and try to prevent me from ending the fight? There are no words to describe how fucking furious I would be if I were to witness that.

  • GarthorGarthor Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    Cowardice. And apathy. In their purest forms. I can't fault somebody for not risking their skin, because as you said the situation could get ugly very fast...

    But do you really think people in the crowd would actually step in and try to prevent me from ending the fight? There are no words to describe how fucking furious I would be if I were to witness that.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bystander_effect

    Pony_Sig.png
  • Witch_Hunter_84Witch_Hunter_84 Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    If you can't beat them, arrange to have them beaten in your presence.
  • FyreWulffFyreWulff Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited May 2011
    And that's not a local store ban like they give to drunks and whatnot. That's every Wal Mart in the country.

  • ForarForar #432 Already prepping for Toronto Fan Expo!Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals..."

    Which is to say that it is an unfortunate aspect of human nature to stand by idly (for a variety of reasons) while another person is victimized, potentially putting yourself into harms way can either be a motivating force for others, or risk making yourself the target for what could essentially be a mob on the edge of something awful. And until you try, you can't know which is which. (or option C they ignore you too, of course)

    I applaud anyone who makes a stand (physically or otherwise) for others because they believe it's the right thing to do, but I can't fault anyone for not being willing to risk their own safety for a stranger (unless it's their job, of course).

    And of course, the likelihood of a mob mentality giving way to people acting in ways they might not have in a one on one situation is part of what can lead to some truly horrific atrocities (in pairs and up) versus that person solo, making it all the more dangerous to get involved.

    I wholeheartedly endorse the action of calling the police first and foremost if at all feasible, or getting someone to do so if you can, even if you intend to help. There is a non-zero chance that your interference will lead to another victim requiring attention, but at least the men/women with law enforcement authority (and guns) should be on their way.

  • LadyMLadyM Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    I thought Snowe was pretty good, for a Republican. (Ie, not a total asshole.) Is that why she's unlikely to be re-elected? :?

  • Muse Among MenMuse Among Men Suburban Bunny Princess? Its time for a new shtick Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    Yeah, I couldn't be a hero and personally intervene. I am not physically intimidating in the least, not even able to look commanding. I'd be much too afraid to step in, though I would try to call the police.

  • tinwhiskerstinwhiskers Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    The thing with intervening is you need to be able to actually end the situation if you intervene. Unless you are concealed carrying, there with a couple friends, a UFC fighter or walking you shutzhund trained German shepard, hopping in to 'even' the odds is a fight you will lose 99 times out of 100.

  • Bobkins FlymoBobkins Flymo Nice day for a Waa WeddingRegistered User, Super Moderator, Moderator mod
    edited May 2011
    Cowardice. And apathy. In their purest forms. I can't fault somebody for not risking their skin, because as you said the situation could get ugly very fast...

    But do you really think people in the crowd would actually step in and try to prevent me from ending the fight? There are no words to describe how fucking furious I would be if I were to witness that.
    I mean that if one person goes from bystander to participant, it might spur others to do the same. I'm no expert on human behavior, but it's a possibility.

    And yeah, if you're in the wrong area, it's definitely possible you could find yourself outnumbered. Especially if you're defending a transsexual. Call the cops, and hope the find ends quickly enough for you to maybe administer some first aid. It really depends on the situation.

    And not to mention the possibility of weapons. Maybe in a 1on1, the asshole enjoys beating on defenseless transfolk. You don't know if he or she has a gun or knife should the situation turn against that person.

    0SZEg7b.png
  • MuddBuddMuddBudd Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    Ok, when did we switch to uncaring bystanders? Could someone link to me whatever started this?

    I feel like I've missed a major news story or something.

    steam_sig.png
  • ForarForar #432 Already prepping for Toronto Fan Expo!Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    I think it stemmed from an earlier period discussing how "tranny" was/is used as an epithet and that moved into a discussion on violence against transsexuals which led to DDV declaring that people who didn't intervene were essentially criminally negligent/complicit (I'm abbreviating here) which led to the tangent regarding doing something to help but it not being wrong to hesitate to put ones own safety or life on the line for a stranger, regardless of the circumstances.

    I've always wondered if I'd rise to the occasion if I saw someone being victimized (regardless of how or why). I'm not MMA champion or packing heat, but at 6'3" I can strike an imposing figure when necessary. Luckily it hasn't really come up in the past decade, and the few times it has, most of them were at work where I had a crew backing me up.

  • KalTorakKalTorak Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    Calling the police is always an acceptable default.

    Unless the police are also bigots or whatever.

  • smeejsmeej Registered User
    edited May 2011
    Gonna be a big handholding parade on the bridge this Sunday. We aren't that bad. I'M NOT SURPRISED THESE DOUCHEBAGS CAME FROM DOWNTOWN. >_>

    IT'S A SAD THING THAT YOUR ADVENTURES HAVE ENDED HERE!!
  • DoctorArchDoctorArch Curmudgeon Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    Forar wrote: »
    I think it stemmed from an earlier period discussing how "tranny" was/is used as an epithet and that moved into a discussion on violence against transsexuals which led to DDV declaring that people who didn't intervene were essentially criminally negligent/complicit (I'm abbreviating here) which led to the tangent regarding doing something to help but it not being wrong to hesitate to put ones own safety or life on the line for a stranger, regardless of the circumstances.

    I've always wondered if I'd rise to the occasion if I saw someone being victimized (regardless of how or why). I'm not MMA champion or packing heat, but at 6'3" I can strike an imposing figure when necessary. Luckily it hasn't really come up in the past decade, and the few times it has, most of them were at work where I had a crew backing me up.

    As much as I sympathize with DDV's feelings on the matter, unless there is an established special duty (e.g.., contractual or familial) or you caused the incident, you never have a duty to assist someone in distress. Ever. There is this terrible example of when a man watched his friend rape and murder a young girl and did nothing to stop the killer from doing so, nor did he offer any encouragement or assistance. There wasn't a single criminal charge that could be levied against him, nor for that matter, any civil suit that would survive a summary judgment motion to dismiss.

    steam_sig.png
  • Regina FongRegina Fong Allons-y, Alonso Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    DoctorArch wrote: »
    Forar wrote: »
    I think it stemmed from an earlier period discussing how "tranny" was/is used as an epithet and that moved into a discussion on violence against transsexuals which led to DDV declaring that people who didn't intervene were essentially criminally negligent/complicit (I'm abbreviating here) which led to the tangent regarding doing something to help but it not being wrong to hesitate to put ones own safety or life on the line for a stranger, regardless of the circumstances.

    I've always wondered if I'd rise to the occasion if I saw someone being victimized (regardless of how or why). I'm not MMA champion or packing heat, but at 6'3" I can strike an imposing figure when necessary. Luckily it hasn't really come up in the past decade, and the few times it has, most of them were at work where I had a crew backing me up.

    As much as I sympathize with DDV's feelings on the matter, unless there is an established special duty (e.g.., contractual or familial) or you caused the incident, you never have a duty to assist someone in distress. Ever. There is this terrible example of when a man watched his friend rape and murder a young girl and did nothing to stop the killer from doing so, nor did he offer any encouragement or assistance. There wasn't a single criminal charge that could be levied against him, nor for that matter, any civil suit that would survive a summary judgment motion to dismiss.

    That's what the court of public opinion is for. And as I recall it "convicted" that guy pretty thoroughly.

  • EmperorSethEmperorSeth Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    Wait, I thought the Seinfeld finale was based on a real-life law?

    EmperorSeth.png
  • DoctorArchDoctorArch Curmudgeon Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    DoctorArch wrote: »
    Forar wrote: »
    I think it stemmed from an earlier period discussing how "tranny" was/is used as an epithet and that moved into a discussion on violence against transsexuals which led to DDV declaring that people who didn't intervene were essentially criminally negligent/complicit (I'm abbreviating here) which led to the tangent regarding doing something to help but it not being wrong to hesitate to put ones own safety or life on the line for a stranger, regardless of the circumstances.

    I've always wondered if I'd rise to the occasion if I saw someone being victimized (regardless of how or why). I'm not MMA champion or packing heat, but at 6'3" I can strike an imposing figure when necessary. Luckily it hasn't really come up in the past decade, and the few times it has, most of them were at work where I had a crew backing me up.

    As much as I sympathize with DDV's feelings on the matter, unless there is an established special duty (e.g.., contractual or familial) or you caused the incident, you never have a duty to assist someone in distress. Ever. There is this terrible example of when a man watched his friend rape and murder a young girl and did nothing to stop the killer from doing so, nor did he offer any encouragement or assistance. There wasn't a single criminal charge that could be levied against him, nor for that matter, any civil suit that would survive a summary judgment motion to dismiss.

    That's what the court of public opinion is for. And as I recall it "convicted" that guy pretty thoroughly.

    Here's the case if anyone's interested. But while David Cash (the Bad Samaritan in question) was publicly shunned at Berkeley, he now apparently has a high paying job working for an oil company. I won't share the link, because it provides all sorts of contact information for the guy so you can contact him to voice your "displeasure."

    steam_sig.png
  • DoctorArchDoctorArch Curmudgeon Registered User regular
    edited May 2011
    Wait, I thought the Seinfeld finale was based on a real-life law?

    Here's the Wiki entry on Duty to Rescue laws. Even when they are on the books (only in ten states) and require that notice be brought to authorities, they are rarely enforced.

    steam_sig.png
This discussion has been closed.