The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
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!

black and white [chat]

195969798100

Posts

  • override367override367 ALL minions Registered User regular
    It's ironic I feel that the 16 year old in question got pretty close to what I think should be a pretty appropriate punishment for his crime but the reason he did was profoundly awful and a travesty of justice

    Nova_CEddyPonyTL DR
  • LudiousLudious I just wanted a sandwich A temporally dislocated QuiznosRegistered User regular
    TehSloth wrote: »
    Ludious wrote: »
    Ludious wrote: »
    Ludious wrote: »
    TehSloth wrote: »
    Ludious wrote: »
    TehSloth wrote: »
    Ludious wrote: »
    Being alive is not a dangerous activity

    Driving a 1 ton death machine is a dangerous activity.

    So you can be sober enough to be a full blown murderer for driving drunk, but not sober enough to consent to accepting the risk of riding with a drunk driver...

    I don't know what the friend being drunk has to do with anything?


    I posit that if the driver has enough agency to be held accountable for the actions of drunk driving, then the passenger who agreed to get in the car with him is not a victim but a willing participant.

    So if the passenger in the car was sober would he be more or less responsible for dying in a car crash?

    more, because you're stupid if you get in the car with a drunk driver. You're also stupid if you drive drunk. You're also stupid if you're drunk and you get in the car with a drunk driver, but not as stupid because you were drunk and didn't think things through.

    But neither is the drunk driver an EVIL MURDERER.

    They are someone who lacked the cognitive agency to fully explore the consequences of their actions.


    I am not saying driving drunk is okay anymore than Pony is. I'm saying I reject that they are horrible evil murderers.
    Errr... this makes it sound like a mental condition that is wholly unexpected and can't be planned for

    Which isn't the case, you know ahead of time when you drink that you'll have to at some point get home. You also know that drunk driving is illegal.

    You also know that getting in the car with someone drunk is fucking bonkers.

    Come on, really? The driver is responsible, he knows before he starts drinking that he's going to be responsible for things that happen while he's driving. This isn't that complicated

    I think we can both agree texting while driving is dangerous because it impairs your abilities. If someone is texting when the driver gets them both killed is it their responsibility? No?

    Because it's the driver's responsibility to not drive impaired!

    I agree, which is why drunk driving should be punished to discourage the behavior. However, that still doesn't make drunk drivers murderers. Manslaughterers? Maybe.

    And it sure as fuck doesn't absolve the drunk friend that got back in the car with you of any responsibility and make them a 100% innocent victim. And to anticipate the question, yes I do think there is a damn sight bit of difference between that and "wearing that skirt", so lets not try to say I'm making this a broad stroke and saying all victims have some responsibility because I am not.

    So, if I was driving recklessly and got in an accident that killed my passenger and I was sober is that not murder?

    I'd argue if you had no INTENT to kill your passenger, then no, that is still manslaughter, but at the very least you were SOBER which puts you back in the realm of having full autonomy over your decisions, so I wouldn't rankle at 2nd degree based on the facts.

    To anticipate the goal posts: If I got in the car with my sober friend, I may not have any valid way of knowing he's going to go 80 in 40. If my friend and I just got through doing shots together for 2 hours and taking pictures with each other at the bar, if he drunkenly has enough agency to be held accountable for driving drunk, I drunkenly have enough agency to be held accountable for deciding to get in the car with him.

  • EddyEddy Gengar the Bittersweet Registered User regular
    A trayvonsty of justice?

    “Even as a gengar she was lovely.” ― Ovid, Metamorphoses
    TehSloth
  • MentalExerciseMentalExercise Indefenestrable Registered User regular
    I'd actually like to chime in that we should multiply mass transit a billion fold in America because driving everywhere all the time as your only option is bad for lots of reasons

    Sure, but we barely have the money to fix the non-maintenance in our current transportation system. We definitely don't have the money to overlay it with even a semi-comprehensive new one.

    Maybe after we sort a bunch of other shit out.

    We absolutely have enough money for all of those things, we just don't have the political will to both allocate it properly and raise the necessary funds

    The logistical undertaking of redesigning a city to efficiently use mass transit is massive. Doing it nationwide in a country of 300m is astronomical. I don't know about where you live, but neither my city nor state can afford it (and MN is doing pretty well economically), and whole the federal government might be able to fund some of their own, they can't afford to subsidize municipal systems nationwide. Is love it if they could, but I've never seen any indication it'd be doable. Now, if they put 10-20 years of serious upkeep into the current infrastructure first, and then maintained that sort of a budget to put a hefty chunk towards mass transit, while encouraging city planners to play along by carrot and stick... I could see is getting there by mid-century. Which sounds like a long time, but that'd be a complete overhaul basically.

    "More fish for Kunta!"

    --LeVar Burton
    Kalkino
  • EddyEddy Gengar the Bittersweet Registered User regular
    vehicular manslaughter, sloth, you floridian

    “Even as a gengar she was lovely.” ― Ovid, Metamorphoses
  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    Gooey wrote: »
    Pony wrote: »
    "Tried as an adult" is a phrase that makes me deeply uncomfortable.

    in what way

    the only people who should be tried as adults

    are adults

    if we, as a society, have adulthood as a legal concept

    then it exists as a concrete concept

    not as a fluid notion to be applied whenever we think a crime is so heinous a child couldn't possibly commit it and there's no way a juvenile system can deal with a crime that bad

    a child is a child

    an adult is an adult

    a child is only ever "tried as an adult" when the prosecution feels their crime is too heinous for juvenile court and the juvenile justice system

    which smacks of a retributive, punishment-oriented system designed to make the public feel avenged, not prevent future crime or restore some quality of life to the victimized.

    TL DRwanderingKalkino
  • TL DRTL DR Not at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered User regular
    Pony wrote: »
    Gooey wrote: »
    Pony wrote: »
    "Tried as an adult" is a phrase that makes me deeply uncomfortable.

    in what way

    the only people who should be tried as adults

    are adults

    if we, as a society, have adulthood as a legal concept

    then it exists as a concrete concept

    not as a fluid notion to be applied whenever we think a crime is so heinous a child couldn't possibly commit it and there's no way a juvenile system can deal with a crime that bad

    a child is a child

    an adult is an adult

    a child is only ever "tried as an adult" when the prosecution feels their crime is too heinous for juvenile court and the juvenile justice system

    which smacks of a retributive, punishment-oriented system designed to make the public feel avenged, not prevent future crime or restore some quality of life to the victimized.

    Those laws exist to protect white children, Pony.

  • LudiousLudious I just wanted a sandwich A temporally dislocated QuiznosRegistered User regular
    edited December 2013
    I think adulthood as a legal concept is silly but there's really no good way to do it otherwise.

    I know some people in their 20s that don't have enough world experience and responsibility to be punished at the same level as their peers.

    Innocence and ignorance don't magically leave your body on your 18th birthday.

    I'm not saying there's a good answer. I'm just saying the one we have is shitty too.

    Ludious on
    Kalkino
  • TehSlothTehSloth does computers Registered User regular
    Eddy wrote: »
    vehicular manslaughter, sloth, you floridian

    Technically, if I did it while escaping from a bank robbery I could probably be charged with felony murder!

    FC: 1993-7778-8872 PSN: TehSloth Xbox: SlothTeh
    twitch.tv/tehsloth
  • EddyEddy Gengar the Bittersweet Registered User regular
    you'd definitely get charged with FM (and in this contrayvoned scenario, convicted)

    “Even as a gengar she was lovely.” ― Ovid, Metamorphoses
    TehSloth
  • ElkiElki learned nothing, and forgotten nothing Moderator, ClubPA mod
    Pony wrote: »
    the amount of animosity and vitriol people reflexively snarl out at drunk drivers makes my eyebrows furrow

    because they're like "If you drive drunk and you hit someone you're a murderer, you knew exactly what you were doing getting behind the wheel of that car and you made a choice and you're just as responsible for that person's death as someone who stabbed another human being to death!"

    yet

    the argument also exists that a person who is chemically inebriated (by alcohol or otherwise) isn't capable of giving their full legal consent and erego someone who takes advantage of them in that state is doing something wrong to them, because they can't make full knowing choices for themselves and are barely aware of what's going on.

    now, i can hear your knee jerking. i can hear you saying "oh c'mon, Pony. There's a clear difference between a guy who is half in the bag and trying to drive and a girl who is black-out drunk at a frat party. The former is still cogent enough of himself to be held responsible and the latter isn't" but that isn't the place the law tries to make its arguments from. It makes its arguments from a place of impairment, and a person who is impaired is a person who is impaired. How impaired they are can be highly variable and can depend on a lot of things, but you'll notice DUI doesn't make a distinction between "He was too tipsy" and "Dude was fuckin' blasted" because an impaired person has impaired reason, impaired judgment, impaired faculties. That's why they're a danger on the road, that's why they can't give consent. They're not themselves, they're not their full cogent faculties. They're impaired.

    so maybe

    maybe

    dial the rhetoric back a little

    still hold people who drive drunk legally responsible for their actions of course

    but

    No. People -while fully undrunk at a function and knowing that they are driving later in the night- will drink with the knowledge that the end of it they will get behind the wheel and take their chances. Everyone person in this thread has seen this happen. I can't make a claim to what percentage of drunk drivers this is, but I'm not buying the claim the only thing to consider is the mental state of that drunk person while they were drunk. Yes, they still could've backed out that point, and their inebriated minds didn't make that decision, but their sober ones also made some god awful terrible decisions.

    NPLhC7Z.png
    Alistair HuttonRetaba
  • spool32spool32 Contrary Library Registered User regular
    Oh man!

    My youngest son, and my Akita, when they were both a lot younger and smaller...

    ZpynwGN.png

    EddyHonkronyabloodyroarxx
  • HonkHonk Honk is this poster. Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    Man talking to a computer program feels so weirdly uncomfortable to me. I remember when cellphone headsets became common that felt so weird to me too, like people were talking into thin air even though I concretely knew what was going. And I of course do that too without feeling weird now.

    But I am not sure I can get used to talking with machines, with voice being the interface. So I think I've identified the border where I become old and kids will look at me in shame like I am senile in 20 years when I can't/won't use cool products anymore.

    PSN: Honkalot
  • japanjapan Registered User regular
    Pony wrote: »
    Gooey wrote: »
    Pony wrote: »
    "Tried as an adult" is a phrase that makes me deeply uncomfortable.

    in what way

    the only people who should be tried as adults

    are adults

    if we, as a society, have adulthood as a legal concept

    then it exists as a concrete concept

    not as a fluid notion to be applied whenever we think a crime is so heinous a child couldn't possibly commit it and there's no way a juvenile system can deal with a crime that bad

    a child is a child

    an adult is an adult

    a child is only ever "tried as an adult" when the prosecution feels their crime is too heinous for juvenile court and the juvenile justice system

    which smacks of a retributive, punishment-oriented system designed to make the public feel avenged, not prevent future crime or restore some quality of life to the victimized.

    More generally, I have a distinct problem with a justice system that arbitrarily decides that they don't like the rules that apply, so they're going to use these rules instead.

    TL DR
  • LudiousLudious I just wanted a sandwich A temporally dislocated QuiznosRegistered User regular
    they take being white serious in the spool household

    RedTide
  • TehSlothTehSloth does computers Registered User regular
    Eddy wrote: »
    you'd definitely get charged with FM (and in this contrayvoned scenario, convicted)

    I'd stand about as much of a chance as a behoodied minority youth in an orlando suburb.

    FC: 1993-7778-8872 PSN: TehSloth Xbox: SlothTeh
    twitch.tv/tehsloth
  • Dread Pirate ArbuthnotDread Pirate Arbuthnot OMG WRIGGLY T O X O P L A S M O S I SRegistered User regular
    Looking through /r/alternativeart

    Steampunk Star Wars

    90s Game of Thrones

    Blaxploitation Star Wars

    Steampunk Avengers

    Traditional Fantasy X-Men

    Seriously, is this all dumb stuff like this

    90's Mass Effect

    ...

    ...

    UoJnOGW.jpg

    Ok that one is kind of cool

    wanderingDeebaserbloodyroarxxHarry Dresden
  • PodlyPodly you unzipped me! it's all coming back! i don't like it!Registered User regular
    follow my music twitter soundcloud tumblr
    9pr1GIh.jpg?1
    HonkTTODewbackDeebaserHarry DresdenGooey
  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    The word synonymous with childhood in this regard is "innocence"

    Not innocence in the sense of being innocent of a crime but innocence in the Platonic sense, in the conceptual notion of childlike innocence of what people can accept a child can and cannot do.

    A 14 year old boy is brought before the court for stealing a car, joyriding, and then smashing it into a post, and gets maybe a bit of time in a juvenile facility and some probation, people will nod their heads and go "He was a stupid kid, doing something dumb. Where were his parents? He needs to get his life straightened out."

    A 14 year old boy shoots a 13 year old boy in the face and kills him over a drug buy, people howl "He's a murderer! Cold-blooded! Try him as an adult!"

    Are those wildly different crimes with wildly different sentences? Absolutely. But that's not why people want him tried as an adult, and you know it and I know it.

  • LudiousLudious I just wanted a sandwich A temporally dislocated QuiznosRegistered User regular
    "What you did is too horrible that you could possibly actually be a child."

    "She looks older than her chronological age."

    One of these concepts is what we base a legal system's punishment concept around.

    The other is something that a judge said that is absolutely awful.

    But it's kinda hard to tell the difference huh?

  • EddyEddy Gengar the Bittersweet Registered User regular
    Ludious wrote: »

    To anticipate the goal posts: If I got in the car with my sober friend, I may not have any valid way of knowing he's going to go 80 in 40. If my friend and I just got through doing shots together for 2 hours and taking pictures with each other at the bar, if he drunkenly has enough agency to be held accountable for driving drunk, I drunkenly have enough agency to be held accountable for deciding to get in the car with him.

    I would say this is a fairly good defense against the paralyzed kid's inevitable civil suit

    the only problem with it is our god damn juries have sympathy for white male youths who are paralyzed from someone else's negligence+, even if they were on the same level of negligence+

    Now if the passenger was sober and the driver drunk it would be on another order of difficulty...

    “Even as a gengar she was lovely.” ― Ovid, Metamorphoses
  • LudiousLudious I just wanted a sandwich A temporally dislocated QuiznosRegistered User regular
    Eddy wrote: »
    Ludious wrote: »

    To anticipate the goal posts: If I got in the car with my sober friend, I may not have any valid way of knowing he's going to go 80 in 40. If my friend and I just got through doing shots together for 2 hours and taking pictures with each other at the bar, if he drunkenly has enough agency to be held accountable for driving drunk, I drunkenly have enough agency to be held accountable for deciding to get in the car with him.

    I would say this is a fairly good defense against the paralyzed kid's inevitable civil suit

    the only problem with it is our god damn juries have sympathy for white male youths who are paralyzed from someone else's negligence+, even if they were on the same level of negligence+

    Now if the passenger was sober and the driver drunk it would be on another order of difficulty...

    In this scenario the passenger should be charged with some sort good Samaritan law violation or aiding and abetting.

  • ronyaronya Arrrrrf. the ivory tower's basementRegistered User regular
    spool32 wrote: »
    Oh man!

    My youngest son, and my Akita, when they were both a lot younger and smaller...

    ZpynwGN.png

    doggie!

    big doggie!

    spool32
  • CindersCinders Whose sails were black when it was windy Registered User regular
    Eddy wrote: »
    Ludious wrote: »

    To anticipate the goal posts: If I got in the car with my sober friend, I may not have any valid way of knowing he's going to go 80 in 40. If my friend and I just got through doing shots together for 2 hours and taking pictures with each other at the bar, if he drunkenly has enough agency to be held accountable for driving drunk, I drunkenly have enough agency to be held accountable for deciding to get in the car with him.

    I would say this is a fairly good defense against the paralyzed kid's inevitable civil suit

    the only problem with it is our god damn juries have sympathy for white male youths who are paralyzed from someone else's negligence+, even if they were on the same level of negligence+

    Now if the passenger was sober and the driver drunk it would be on another order of difficulty...

    Make everybody watch the Wire

  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    in a nutshell retributive justice can fuck off

    restorative justice 4 life

    21stCenturyTL DRwandering
  • NecoNeco A gross misandrist tumblr harpy Registered User regular
    Elki wrote: »
    Pony wrote: »
    the amount of animosity and vitriol people reflexively snarl out at drunk drivers makes my eyebrows furrow

    because they're like "If you drive drunk and you hit someone you're a murderer, you knew exactly what you were doing getting behind the wheel of that car and you made a choice and you're just as responsible for that person's death as someone who stabbed another human being to death!"

    yet

    the argument also exists that a person who is chemically inebriated (by alcohol or otherwise) isn't capable of giving their full legal consent and erego someone who takes advantage of them in that state is doing something wrong to them, because they can't make full knowing choices for themselves and are barely aware of what's going on.

    now, i can hear your knee jerking. i can hear you saying "oh c'mon, Pony. There's a clear difference between a guy who is half in the bag and trying to drive and a girl who is black-out drunk at a frat party. The former is still cogent enough of himself to be held responsible and the latter isn't" but that isn't the place the law tries to make its arguments from. It makes its arguments from a place of impairment, and a person who is impaired is a person who is impaired. How impaired they are can be highly variable and can depend on a lot of things, but you'll notice DUI doesn't make a distinction between "He was too tipsy" and "Dude was fuckin' blasted" because an impaired person has impaired reason, impaired judgment, impaired faculties. That's why they're a danger on the road, that's why they can't give consent. They're not themselves, they're not their full cogent faculties. They're impaired.

    so maybe

    maybe

    dial the rhetoric back a little

    still hold people who drive drunk legally responsible for their actions of course

    but

    No. People -while fully undrunk at a function and knowing that they are driving later in the night- will drink with the knowledge that the end of it they will get behind the wheel and take their chances. Everyone person in this thread has seen this happen. I can't make a claim to what percentage of drunk drivers this is, but I'm not buying the claim the only thing to consider is the mental state of that drunk person while they were drunk. Yes, they still could've backed out that point, and their inebriated minds didn't make that decision, but their sober ones also made some god awful terrible decisions.

    One thing to point out on this point is that people with severe enough drinking problems can have quite a lot to drink and still feel normal. They are absolutely impaired, but they might feel totally fine to get in a car and drive. Not that they are not fully responsible for getting behind the wheel, but just a distinction to make.

  • y2jake215y2jake215 Lars von Trihard/Cinnabon Iver young ass popeRegistered User regular
    spool32 wrote: »
    Oh man!

    My youngest son, and my Akita, when they were both a lot younger and smaller...

    ZpynwGN.png

    even then he couldn't find his shoes

    C8Ft8GE.jpg
    maybe i'm streaming terrible dj right now if i am its here
    ronyaTehSlothEddyDread Pirate Arbuthnotspool32PonyShazkar ShadowstormCindersLudiousDeebaserbloodyroarxxIrond WillChanusGooey
  • HonkHonk Honk is this poster. Registered User, __BANNED USERS regular
    May I question why there are binary alternatives for tried as adult and being tried as a child.

    Like for instance a ten year old accidentally discharging a weapon that hits someone cannot likely have any fucking clue. But a sixteen year old for instance drunk driving and killing people I would say probably has a pretty well formed idea of what can happen; the concept of death; personal responsibility to some degree.

    That being said I know almost zero about this case in particular.

    PSN: Honkalot
  • LudiousLudious I just wanted a sandwich A temporally dislocated QuiznosRegistered User regular
    If you think a 16 year old has a concept of death you've never seen their car insurance rates

    EddyDeebaserRedTide
  • Shazkar ShadowstormShazkar Shadowstorm Registered User regular
    Podly wrote: »
    two hours to get my kimchi tacos whadthey go to korea to make it or somepin

    ur a lazy butt

    poo
    PodlyCinders
  • HenroidHenroid How do you get a centrist to change their mind? Take away their privilege.Registered User regular
    My grandma is teaching my brothers how to make Portuguese sweetbread and is a lot like Yoda. Only it's, "Do or do not, FUCK IT GET OUT OF MY WAY."

    Seeking artists for well-paid commissions. PM me.
    "Ultima Online Pre-Trammel is the perfect example of why libertarians are full of shit."
    - @Ludious
  • Shazkar ShadowstormShazkar Shadowstorm Registered User regular
    burn it all down, bulldoze everything, build trains everywhere and then now we have self driving cars and problem is solved DUH SO EASY DUH I SHOULD WIN A PRIZE

    poo
    MentalExercise
  • PodlyPodly you unzipped me! it's all coming back! i don't like it!Registered User regular
    i no

    follow my music twitter soundcloud tumblr
    9pr1GIh.jpg?1
  • EddyEddy Gengar the Bittersweet Registered User regular
    you should buy a bucket of kimchi, a stack of shells, some sliced sirloin

    start a SaniTaco branch

    “Even as a gengar she was lovely.” ― Ovid, Metamorphoses
  • PonyPony Registered User regular
    honestly reading up on this whole "Affluenza" thing it seems like the McDonalds hot coffee woman all over again

    where the wrong details are getting emphasized, the facts of the case are getting ignored, and the media is riling people up for the sake of riling people up

    KalkinoNova_Cspool32
  • CindersCinders Whose sails were black when it was windy Registered User regular
    Let's put everyone in arcologies. Then no one needs to drive.

    TehSlothKalkino
  • KalkinoKalkino Buttons Londres Registered User regular
    Diminished responsibility is a hard topic but a hardly a new one and how that concept applies often depends on the offence. But I don't really care about the case law tbh. I'm not a criminal lawyer so I don't need to and I am happy to apply judgement based on foreseeability.

    Freedom for the Northern Isles!
  • 21stCentury21stCentury The Bismuth Heart Beats with the timesRegistered User regular
    I should go to the Randolf pub in Montreal.

    it's a game pub. it's a pub with loads of boardgames to play.

  • DeebaserDeebaser on my way to work in a suit and a tie Ahhhh...come on fucking guyRegistered User regular
    This dude better let us out by 6:30 or Imma be so mad

    YOLO. Swag. Whatever. Fuck it. Lets do this.
  • LudiousLudious I just wanted a sandwich A temporally dislocated QuiznosRegistered User regular
    or we could just give this whole humanity thing up, admit defeat, and all agree to press the big red button

    Eddy
This discussion has been closed.