• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Daniel Penny acquitted in the death of Jordan Neely

Stopping a rape does not necessarily require killing or even harming the rapist. I find your argument to be ridiculous fear mongering.
Of course it would. Stopping any rape would involve extreme exposure to the legal system. You would have to be an idiot to even touch someone without risk of being blamed and prosecuted by the all the do gooder lawyers. And you are not going to stop a rape without touching that person.
What nonsense. Intervention can take all forms. Hell, just photographing the perp might stop it.
And might get your phone smashed and you hurt.
Which is not relevant to the point of possible legal action from intervention.
The point is that intervention even to the level of taking a picture can be dangerous.
Which is irrelevant to the point of legal action from intervention.
 
Nevertheless, closing the mental hospitals and dumping the patients was a police of his party and administration.
Tom
Placing the blame on one man is ridiculous. The legislation in question (repeal of MHSA?) was passed by Congress, and Democrats had a majority in the House.

Besides, that was over four decades ago. Many presidents and congresses came and went in that time.
It is easier to complain about the problem than to fix the problem. Especially when those who oppose what Reagan did were in power and could have fixed this.
The people complaining about it are in the thread. The general populace doesn't give enough of a fuck or at least not enough to pay for it, so the problem is ignored.
The Democrats have had near solid control of California for over 20 years. They've had the supermajority in their legislature a few times recently. They could have reversed what Reagan did as governor half a century ago. "Look what Reagan did so long ago" appears to be more effective than "I propose to fix a problem."
You keep rambling on as if the Democrat Party are worshipped as the do no wrong, high morality party here. Most in his forum feel the Democrats are far too centralized politics wise, since Bill Clinton was President. Seeing the right-wing media portrayal of the Democrats for the bullshit it is, shouldn't be mistaken for reverence of the Democrats. The fact is, it is the only party that is remotely close enough to being some level of empathetic to the average voter. So from a pragmatic level, we are left with no other option.
 
The fact that no one called in the police has absolutely nothing to do with Penny's situation. I understand that there are people who feel like that in your argument - they wouldn't get involved in any event.
Fine so far. Anyone afraid of the fallout of calling the cops isn't going to get involved.
Mr Penny was charged with negligent criminal homicide for harming anyone. He was charged because his actions caused the death of Mr. Neely. Stopping a rape does not necessarily require killing or even harming the rapist. I find your argument to be ridiculous fear mongering.
But here you are wrong. You seem to have some notion that people can magically be restrained without harming them. That's not how it works--in a one-on-one situation without a big force superiority you can't do it. Look at how the cops handle it--pile on. Because that's what works. They don't have ways to control a person without harming them in a one-on-one type situation, you're holding civilians to a higher standard.
Nonsense. Stopping a crime doesn’t necessarily require restraint or control. Maybe a shout or the possibility of identification works.
He had said he was willing to die. That removed identification as a threat.
Show your work because it makes mo sense.
 
Back
Top Bottom