Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Truean]

Same thing with lawyers, except 60 digit student loans.... They lied to us all basically.

I...I really hope that's a typo. Or that you guys just track your loans with a ridiculous number of leading and/or trailing zeroes.

Yes, typo. 6 digit That's what I get for trying to reward myself with posting privileges while doing record keeping.  When I input X pages of stuff, I get to come here for a second. Motivation, it helps.

[Virex]

Same thing with lawyers, except 60 digit student loans.... They lied to us all basically.

I...I really hope that's a typo. Or that you guys just track your loans with a ridiculous number of leading and/or trailing zeroes.

That's what happens if you convert your debt into Pengo's

[Loud Whispers]

...And that's 100,000,000,000,000 pengo change!

[Truean]

http://news.yahoo.com/several-executives-leave-komen-controversy-212830497.html

Good, actual consequences. They've messed up a charity's hard earned reputation for their politically motivated crap, which is the opposite of what their job is. That reputation took years to build and only a short time to severely damage. Their job wasn't to crush Planned Parenthood, it was to advance the interests of the charity they worked for. The motivation was all wrong and so was the result.

Thanks to them, lots of people will have a sour taste in their mouths from the word "Komen," for quite some time. I know several women, who spent years fund raising for them, who now will have nothing to do with the organization. I'm not even sure what you can do to repair that kind of damage or if it can be repaired.

Essentially, "The charity's policy chief, Karen Handel, was running for governor of Georgia on a republican ticket opposing abortion," so she tried to abuse her position for direct electoral political gain. Nice....

[RedKing]

Same thing with lawyers, except 60 digit student loans.... They lied to us all basically.

I...I really hope that's a typo. Or that you guys just track your loans with a ridiculous number of leading and/or trailing zeroes.

That's what happens if you convert your debt into Pengo's

Spoiler: This was my first thought when I read that. (click to show/hide)

Spoiler: This was second. (click to show/hide)

[MonkeyHead]

Apologies if this has been batted around on here already, but I have been a little out of the loop after a few days devoted to professional practice...

So, yea. Trayvon Martin. Can someone please explain the "stand your ground law" that applies in Florida to me please. From what I have gathered through reading up via the BBC, a "chase and fight" was involved in the shooting. Chasing someone before killing them doesnt sound a whole lot like self defence to me.

[Bauglir]

Well, what if he got some friends and came back? (This is a sarcastic post)

[Frumple]

You can see the statute itself here. Section 3 is the SYG part. Basics of it is if you're in a place you have a right to be outside the home, you can defend yourself with lethal force if you have good reason to believe the situation calls for it; you're not legally required to retreat.

The details released to the public seem to have it pretty clear cut that Zimmerman isn't protected by Florida's SYG law (and thus should be in the process of facing trial), but it's possible there's more to the story than publicly released. Unless more news hits the public, there's not much more that could be said.

[GlyphGryph]

I make it a point not to pass judgement on crime stories in regards to the guilt or innocence of specific persons (though I will comment on a refusal to prosecute just because the alleged is a cop or politician or has a lot of money), specifically for that reason. We don't - can't, even - know the details the jurors know. There's a reason this is such a long process, after all.

[Truean]

.

[Euld]

China continues to prove that it's just... augh I can't think of anything funny.

edit: They forced people to put up pictures of Mao in their homes?  Seriously ._. I might have a picture of Obama somewhere, except with funny text on it that makes fun of him too

[RedKing]

Sadly, the Tibet question is one of those areas that just seems to trigger a knee-jerk response by the CCP, regardless of how bright and forward-thinking its members want to be.

The whole "putting up pictures of Mao" thing is really bizarre, considering that most Chinese (including CCP members) will privately admit that Mao was a total bastard. But it hasn't quite reached the same level that "de-Stalinization" did in the Soviet Union. It's still bad form to publicly criticize Mao, and there's a new crop of young nationalists (who never lived through the excesses of the Cultural Revolution and the Great Leap Forward) who will harass and vilify anybody who dares criticize Mao or the Communist system.

These same fen qing ("angry youth") are also virulently anti-Tibetan, anti-Japanese, anti-Taiwanese, anti-anybody that dares upset the apple cart and/or criticize China. Frankly, I think the CCP is as scared of them as anyone else, in the same way that Mao eventually had to purge the Red Guards youth cadres he helped to create, because they had gone too far.

[G-Flex]

The police aren't going to investigate practically. The ability of the police to arrest someone in a violent crime claiming self defense is severely limited under the "Stand your Ground" law and it makes arrest difficult if not impossible without direct evidence of malice.

In principle, this makes sense, but in this case the killer directly sought out a confrontation unnecessarily even after instructed by emergency services to let the police handle it. I'd think that would at least be enough evidence to arrest the guy and investigate further.

Also: Even under Florida's law:

A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

I'd think they would at least arrest him based on the simple fact that he killed a guy, and then investigate or allow an affirmative defense that he was the one attacked first and felt it necessary to use deadly force... and there's some very basic evidence against that in the fact that he sought out the victim, apparently seeking confrontation when it wasn't necessary.

[Truean]

How dare he wear a hoodie.... http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/geraldo-rivera-finds-real-culprit-trayvon-martin-slaying-182043689.html

"Alert: hoodies can get your kid killed," he tweeted.

.... If you kill someone based solely upon what they wear, then you are wrong. If you attempt to justify or mitigate murder based upon clothing, then you are wrong.

[G-Flex]

He won't say that he went out there to pursue him. He will say that he went out there because he looked like he was going to break into someone's house. Good luck proving he didn't believe that reasonably beyond a reasonable doubt.

There was a 911 call where he was instructed to leave the situation alone and not pursue him, wasn't there?

I know how burden of proof works; I'm just not sure why self-defense is normally an affirmative defense and this apparently isn't.