|
On April 26 2012 03:13 dpurple wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2012 02:53 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 26 2012 00:28 dpurple wrote:On April 26 2012 00:24 phoenix`down wrote:On April 26 2012 00:05 scarrow wrote:On April 25 2012 23:49 TheToast wrote:On April 25 2012 21:37 Video2000 wrote:
It does seem like Americans have a hard time dealing with criticism w regards to how their justice system works (even some of the bans/warnings so far). This is obviously an absolutely wacked out insane case, but like other people ITT have mentioned, it's not the first time to hear stories like that, nor really is it a surprise. Not trolling, it just seems like there are some issues that aren't adressed..? And we say the same things about the European justice system. Putting someone in jail for writing racist twitter posts or displaying a swastika would be completely unthinkable in the US. It's not that we support racism, but the freedom of speech is deeply entrenched in our society. The difference is that the guy who posted racist twitter remarks got a sentence of 56 days in jail. This guy has gotten 7.5 years for running over someones toe. Bit of a fucking difference. I think both sentences are ridiculously long, but to me 56 days just for writing some words seems way worse than 7.5 years for running over some limbs. He could have pretty easily killed someone, accident or not, and he is lucky he didn't. Yea, just wish those celebrities with repeated DUI's got 7.5 year in jail too. Why? Being a celebrity is irrelevant, why the stupid comments like that? A DUI is no jail time first time, possibly a few days second time, and third time it's three months (shortened from previously six months). It's handled mostly with taking away your license and imposing hefty fines. Isn't that exactly how you prefer it in Europe? Or were you just trying to do more U.S. bashing? Why is that a stupid comment? I only know how celebrities get threated in DUI cases. Because those are the people media reports about.
You honestly can't see why it's stupid? Sorry that's all you see when looking at the U.S., but it's clear you're too ignorant to make any legitimate judgement, despite you trying to clearly do so anyways. Funny, you don't even know how the ordinary person is treated, but you make stupid claims anyways.
|
On April 26 2012 03:27 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2012 03:13 dpurple wrote:On April 26 2012 02:53 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 26 2012 00:28 dpurple wrote:On April 26 2012 00:24 phoenix`down wrote:On April 26 2012 00:05 scarrow wrote:On April 25 2012 23:49 TheToast wrote:On April 25 2012 21:37 Video2000 wrote:
It does seem like Americans have a hard time dealing with criticism w regards to how their justice system works (even some of the bans/warnings so far). This is obviously an absolutely wacked out insane case, but like other people ITT have mentioned, it's not the first time to hear stories like that, nor really is it a surprise. Not trolling, it just seems like there are some issues that aren't adressed..? And we say the same things about the European justice system. Putting someone in jail for writing racist twitter posts or displaying a swastika would be completely unthinkable in the US. It's not that we support racism, but the freedom of speech is deeply entrenched in our society. The difference is that the guy who posted racist twitter remarks got a sentence of 56 days in jail. This guy has gotten 7.5 years for running over someones toe. Bit of a fucking difference. I think both sentences are ridiculously long, but to me 56 days just for writing some words seems way worse than 7.5 years for running over some limbs. He could have pretty easily killed someone, accident or not, and he is lucky he didn't. Yea, just wish those celebrities with repeated DUI's got 7.5 year in jail too. Why? Being a celebrity is irrelevant, why the stupid comments like that? A DUI is no jail time first time, possibly a few days second time, and third time it's three months (shortened from previously six months). It's handled mostly with taking away your license and imposing hefty fines. Isn't that exactly how you prefer it in Europe? Or were you just trying to do more U.S. bashing? Why is that a stupid comment? I only know how celebrities get threated in DUI cases. Because those are the people media reports about. You honestly can't see why it's stupid? Sorry that's all you see when looking at the U.S., but it's clear you're too ignorant to make any legitimate judgement, despite you trying to clearly do so anyways. Funny, you don't even know how the ordinary person is treated, but you make stupid claims anyways.
why don't you tell us then? seeing you are so high and mighty
|
On April 26 2012 03:28 raser wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2012 03:27 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 26 2012 03:13 dpurple wrote:On April 26 2012 02:53 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 26 2012 00:28 dpurple wrote:On April 26 2012 00:24 phoenix`down wrote:On April 26 2012 00:05 scarrow wrote:On April 25 2012 23:49 TheToast wrote:On April 25 2012 21:37 Video2000 wrote:
It does seem like Americans have a hard time dealing with criticism w regards to how their justice system works (even some of the bans/warnings so far). This is obviously an absolutely wacked out insane case, but like other people ITT have mentioned, it's not the first time to hear stories like that, nor really is it a surprise. Not trolling, it just seems like there are some issues that aren't adressed..? And we say the same things about the European justice system. Putting someone in jail for writing racist twitter posts or displaying a swastika would be completely unthinkable in the US. It's not that we support racism, but the freedom of speech is deeply entrenched in our society. The difference is that the guy who posted racist twitter remarks got a sentence of 56 days in jail. This guy has gotten 7.5 years for running over someones toe. Bit of a fucking difference. I think both sentences are ridiculously long, but to me 56 days just for writing some words seems way worse than 7.5 years for running over some limbs. He could have pretty easily killed someone, accident or not, and he is lucky he didn't. Yea, just wish those celebrities with repeated DUI's got 7.5 year in jail too. Why? Being a celebrity is irrelevant, why the stupid comments like that? A DUI is no jail time first time, possibly a few days second time, and third time it's three months (shortened from previously six months). It's handled mostly with taking away your license and imposing hefty fines. Isn't that exactly how you prefer it in Europe? Or were you just trying to do more U.S. bashing? Why is that a stupid comment? I only know how celebrities get threated in DUI cases. Because those are the people media reports about. You honestly can't see why it's stupid? Sorry that's all you see when looking at the U.S., but it's clear you're too ignorant to make any legitimate judgement, despite you trying to clearly do so anyways. Funny, you don't even know how the ordinary person is treated, but you make stupid claims anyways. why don't you tell us then? seeing you are so high and mighty
Tell you what? That it has absolutely nothing to do with celebrities like his ridiculous assumption? That no one gets jail time of 7 years for DUIs, whether you're loaded or not? It's not that complicated.
On April 26 2012 01:29 Jarree wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2012 01:01 Triggi wrote:On April 26 2012 00:37 TheToast wrote:On April 26 2012 00:28 dpurple wrote:On April 26 2012 00:24 phoenix`down wrote:On April 26 2012 00:05 scarrow wrote:On April 25 2012 23:49 TheToast wrote:On April 25 2012 21:37 Video2000 wrote:
It does seem like Americans have a hard time dealing with criticism w regards to how their justice system works (even some of the bans/warnings so far). This is obviously an absolutely wacked out insane case, but like other people ITT have mentioned, it's not the first time to hear stories like that, nor really is it a surprise. Not trolling, it just seems like there are some issues that aren't adressed..? And we say the same things about the European justice system. Putting someone in jail for writing racist twitter posts or displaying a swastika would be completely unthinkable in the US. It's not that we support racism, but the freedom of speech is deeply entrenched in our society. The difference is that the guy who posted racist twitter remarks got a sentence of 56 days in jail. This guy has gotten 7.5 years for running over someones toe. Bit of a fucking difference. I think both sentences are ridiculously long, but to me 56 days just for writing some words seems way worse than 7.5 years for running over some limbs. He could have pretty easily killed someone, accident or not, and he is lucky he didn't. Yea, just wish those celebrities with repeated DUI's got 7.5 year in jail too. Punishements for DUIs in this country are very disproportional to other dangerous crimes. I know for a while in my state, you had to get two DUIs before they would even take your license away. Just a few years ago the state legislature finally passed a law that toughened up the restrictions. There's been an effort on that front in a number of states and it's long overdue. Lane Garrison. 40 months for a dui which ended in several injuries and a death. Guess he had a good lawyer or something because this to me seems more serious than what the student got. Is this a real thing or just in movies and TV? In Finland it barely makes any difference who your lawyer is in regarding the punishment. Of course there are some complicated cases, but in no case a lawyer makes a difference from 7 year to 2 years in prison.
Huge difference is that the Lane Garrison guy pleaded guilty. Also, it depends on what state you're convicted in, I believe. In California, killing someone while under the influence is murder, not manslaughter. A lawyer makes a difference in the sense they are better at arguing, finding loopholes, and appealing to certain sympathies usually.
Also realize Lane Garrison had $300,000 in fines.
Last, if you care to investigate how the U.S. system works, the Norweigian guy more than likely will get out a few years early. He would have had a significantly less severe sentence, I presume, had he plead guilty.
|
On April 26 2012 03:27 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2012 03:13 dpurple wrote:On April 26 2012 02:53 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 26 2012 00:28 dpurple wrote:On April 26 2012 00:24 phoenix`down wrote:On April 26 2012 00:05 scarrow wrote:On April 25 2012 23:49 TheToast wrote:On April 25 2012 21:37 Video2000 wrote:
It does seem like Americans have a hard time dealing with criticism w regards to how their justice system works (even some of the bans/warnings so far). This is obviously an absolutely wacked out insane case, but like other people ITT have mentioned, it's not the first time to hear stories like that, nor really is it a surprise. Not trolling, it just seems like there are some issues that aren't adressed..? And we say the same things about the European justice system. Putting someone in jail for writing racist twitter posts or displaying a swastika would be completely unthinkable in the US. It's not that we support racism, but the freedom of speech is deeply entrenched in our society. The difference is that the guy who posted racist twitter remarks got a sentence of 56 days in jail. This guy has gotten 7.5 years for running over someones toe. Bit of a fucking difference. I think both sentences are ridiculously long, but to me 56 days just for writing some words seems way worse than 7.5 years for running over some limbs. He could have pretty easily killed someone, accident or not, and he is lucky he didn't. Yea, just wish those celebrities with repeated DUI's got 7.5 year in jail too. Why? Being a celebrity is irrelevant, why the stupid comments like that? A DUI is no jail time first time, possibly a few days second time, and third time it's three months (shortened from previously six months). It's handled mostly with taking away your license and imposing hefty fines. Isn't that exactly how you prefer it in Europe? Or were you just trying to do more U.S. bashing? Why is that a stupid comment? I only know how celebrities get threated in DUI cases. Because those are the people media reports about. You honestly can't see why it's stupid? Sorry that's all you see when looking at the U.S., but it's clear you're too ignorant to make any legitimate judgement, despite you trying to clearly do so anyways. Funny, you don't even know how the ordinary person is treated, but you make stupid claims anyways.
:D
You dont read very well do you? I compared punishment of celebrities with multiple DUI's to the punishment of this norwegian guy. I never claimed celebrities get lower punishments. And I never made any claims about any "ordinary person" either.
|
On April 26 2012 03:39 dpurple wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2012 03:27 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 26 2012 03:13 dpurple wrote:On April 26 2012 02:53 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 26 2012 00:28 dpurple wrote:On April 26 2012 00:24 phoenix`down wrote:On April 26 2012 00:05 scarrow wrote:On April 25 2012 23:49 TheToast wrote:On April 25 2012 21:37 Video2000 wrote:
It does seem like Americans have a hard time dealing with criticism w regards to how their justice system works (even some of the bans/warnings so far). This is obviously an absolutely wacked out insane case, but like other people ITT have mentioned, it's not the first time to hear stories like that, nor really is it a surprise. Not trolling, it just seems like there are some issues that aren't adressed..? And we say the same things about the European justice system. Putting someone in jail for writing racist twitter posts or displaying a swastika would be completely unthinkable in the US. It's not that we support racism, but the freedom of speech is deeply entrenched in our society. The difference is that the guy who posted racist twitter remarks got a sentence of 56 days in jail. This guy has gotten 7.5 years for running over someones toe. Bit of a fucking difference. I think both sentences are ridiculously long, but to me 56 days just for writing some words seems way worse than 7.5 years for running over some limbs. He could have pretty easily killed someone, accident or not, and he is lucky he didn't. Yea, just wish those celebrities with repeated DUI's got 7.5 year in jail too. Why? Being a celebrity is irrelevant, why the stupid comments like that? A DUI is no jail time first time, possibly a few days second time, and third time it's three months (shortened from previously six months). It's handled mostly with taking away your license and imposing hefty fines. Isn't that exactly how you prefer it in Europe? Or were you just trying to do more U.S. bashing? Why is that a stupid comment? I only know how celebrities get threated in DUI cases. Because those are the people media reports about. You honestly can't see why it's stupid? Sorry that's all you see when looking at the U.S., but it's clear you're too ignorant to make any legitimate judgement, despite you trying to clearly do so anyways. Funny, you don't even know how the ordinary person is treated, but you make stupid claims anyways. :D You dont read very well do you? I compared punishment of celebrities with multiple DUI's to the punishment of this norwegian guy. I never claimed celebrities get lower punishments. And I never made any claims about any "ordinary person" either.
I read it fine. There is absolutely no reason to compare punishment of celebrities in particular unless you're making a point about them specifically. That's how debates work.
According to standardized tests I score in reading the top percentile, so I'm not too worried.
|
On April 26 2012 03:31 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2012 03:28 raser wrote:On April 26 2012 03:27 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 26 2012 03:13 dpurple wrote:On April 26 2012 02:53 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 26 2012 00:28 dpurple wrote:On April 26 2012 00:24 phoenix`down wrote:On April 26 2012 00:05 scarrow wrote:On April 25 2012 23:49 TheToast wrote:On April 25 2012 21:37 Video2000 wrote:
It does seem like Americans have a hard time dealing with criticism w regards to how their justice system works (even some of the bans/warnings so far). This is obviously an absolutely wacked out insane case, but like other people ITT have mentioned, it's not the first time to hear stories like that, nor really is it a surprise. Not trolling, it just seems like there are some issues that aren't adressed..? And we say the same things about the European justice system. Putting someone in jail for writing racist twitter posts or displaying a swastika would be completely unthinkable in the US. It's not that we support racism, but the freedom of speech is deeply entrenched in our society. The difference is that the guy who posted racist twitter remarks got a sentence of 56 days in jail. This guy has gotten 7.5 years for running over someones toe. Bit of a fucking difference. I think both sentences are ridiculously long, but to me 56 days just for writing some words seems way worse than 7.5 years for running over some limbs. He could have pretty easily killed someone, accident or not, and he is lucky he didn't. Yea, just wish those celebrities with repeated DUI's got 7.5 year in jail too. Why? Being a celebrity is irrelevant, why the stupid comments like that? A DUI is no jail time first time, possibly a few days second time, and third time it's three months (shortened from previously six months). It's handled mostly with taking away your license and imposing hefty fines. Isn't that exactly how you prefer it in Europe? Or were you just trying to do more U.S. bashing? Why is that a stupid comment? I only know how celebrities get threated in DUI cases. Because those are the people media reports about. You honestly can't see why it's stupid? Sorry that's all you see when looking at the U.S., but it's clear you're too ignorant to make any legitimate judgement, despite you trying to clearly do so anyways. Funny, you don't even know how the ordinary person is treated, but you make stupid claims anyways. why don't you tell us then? seeing you are so high and mighty Tell you what? That it has absolutely nothing to do with celebrities like his ridiculous assumption? That no one gets jail time of 7 years for DUIs, whether you're loaded or not? It's not that complicated. Show nested quote +On April 26 2012 01:29 Jarree wrote:On April 26 2012 01:01 Triggi wrote:On April 26 2012 00:37 TheToast wrote:On April 26 2012 00:28 dpurple wrote:On April 26 2012 00:24 phoenix`down wrote:On April 26 2012 00:05 scarrow wrote:On April 25 2012 23:49 TheToast wrote:On April 25 2012 21:37 Video2000 wrote:
It does seem like Americans have a hard time dealing with criticism w regards to how their justice system works (even some of the bans/warnings so far). This is obviously an absolutely wacked out insane case, but like other people ITT have mentioned, it's not the first time to hear stories like that, nor really is it a surprise. Not trolling, it just seems like there are some issues that aren't adressed..? And we say the same things about the European justice system. Putting someone in jail for writing racist twitter posts or displaying a swastika would be completely unthinkable in the US. It's not that we support racism, but the freedom of speech is deeply entrenched in our society. The difference is that the guy who posted racist twitter remarks got a sentence of 56 days in jail. This guy has gotten 7.5 years for running over someones toe. Bit of a fucking difference. I think both sentences are ridiculously long, but to me 56 days just for writing some words seems way worse than 7.5 years for running over some limbs. He could have pretty easily killed someone, accident or not, and he is lucky he didn't. Yea, just wish those celebrities with repeated DUI's got 7.5 year in jail too. Punishements for DUIs in this country are very disproportional to other dangerous crimes. I know for a while in my state, you had to get two DUIs before they would even take your license away. Just a few years ago the state legislature finally passed a law that toughened up the restrictions. There's been an effort on that front in a number of states and it's long overdue. Lane Garrison. 40 months for a dui which ended in several injuries and a death. Guess he had a good lawyer or something because this to me seems more serious than what the student got. Is this a real thing or just in movies and TV? In Finland it barely makes any difference who your lawyer is in regarding the punishment. Of course there are some complicated cases, but in no case a lawyer makes a difference from 7 year to 2 years in prison. Huge difference is that the Lane Garrison guy pleaded guilty. Also, it depends on what state you're convicted in, I believe. In California, killing someone while under the influence is murder, not manslaughter. A lawyer makes a difference in the sense they are better at arguing, finding loopholes, and appealing to certain sympathies usually. Also realize Lane Garrison had $300,000 in fines.Last, if you care to investigate how the U.S. system works, the Norweigian guy more than likely will get out a few years early. He would have had a significantly less severe sentence, I presume, had he plead guilty.
Would you think that an "ordinary" (poor) person would get $300,000 fine that he can never pay? (just a question, since you seem to read too much into things)
|
On April 26 2012 03:42 dpurple wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2012 03:31 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 26 2012 03:28 raser wrote:On April 26 2012 03:27 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 26 2012 03:13 dpurple wrote:On April 26 2012 02:53 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 26 2012 00:28 dpurple wrote:On April 26 2012 00:24 phoenix`down wrote:On April 26 2012 00:05 scarrow wrote:On April 25 2012 23:49 TheToast wrote:
[quote]
And we say the same things about the European justice system. Putting someone in jail for writing racist twitter posts or displaying a swastika would be completely unthinkable in the US. It's not that we support racism, but the freedom of speech is deeply entrenched in our society.
The difference is that the guy who posted racist twitter remarks got a sentence of 56 days in jail. This guy has gotten 7.5 years for running over someones toe. Bit of a fucking difference. I think both sentences are ridiculously long, but to me 56 days just for writing some words seems way worse than 7.5 years for running over some limbs. He could have pretty easily killed someone, accident or not, and he is lucky he didn't. Yea, just wish those celebrities with repeated DUI's got 7.5 year in jail too. Why? Being a celebrity is irrelevant, why the stupid comments like that? A DUI is no jail time first time, possibly a few days second time, and third time it's three months (shortened from previously six months). It's handled mostly with taking away your license and imposing hefty fines. Isn't that exactly how you prefer it in Europe? Or were you just trying to do more U.S. bashing? Why is that a stupid comment? I only know how celebrities get threated in DUI cases. Because those are the people media reports about. You honestly can't see why it's stupid? Sorry that's all you see when looking at the U.S., but it's clear you're too ignorant to make any legitimate judgement, despite you trying to clearly do so anyways. Funny, you don't even know how the ordinary person is treated, but you make stupid claims anyways. why don't you tell us then? seeing you are so high and mighty Tell you what? That it has absolutely nothing to do with celebrities like his ridiculous assumption? That no one gets jail time of 7 years for DUIs, whether you're loaded or not? It's not that complicated. On April 26 2012 01:29 Jarree wrote:On April 26 2012 01:01 Triggi wrote:On April 26 2012 00:37 TheToast wrote:On April 26 2012 00:28 dpurple wrote:On April 26 2012 00:24 phoenix`down wrote:On April 26 2012 00:05 scarrow wrote:On April 25 2012 23:49 TheToast wrote:On April 25 2012 21:37 Video2000 wrote:
It does seem like Americans have a hard time dealing with criticism w regards to how their justice system works (even some of the bans/warnings so far). This is obviously an absolutely wacked out insane case, but like other people ITT have mentioned, it's not the first time to hear stories like that, nor really is it a surprise. Not trolling, it just seems like there are some issues that aren't adressed..? And we say the same things about the European justice system. Putting someone in jail for writing racist twitter posts or displaying a swastika would be completely unthinkable in the US. It's not that we support racism, but the freedom of speech is deeply entrenched in our society. The difference is that the guy who posted racist twitter remarks got a sentence of 56 days in jail. This guy has gotten 7.5 years for running over someones toe. Bit of a fucking difference. I think both sentences are ridiculously long, but to me 56 days just for writing some words seems way worse than 7.5 years for running over some limbs. He could have pretty easily killed someone, accident or not, and he is lucky he didn't. Yea, just wish those celebrities with repeated DUI's got 7.5 year in jail too. Punishements for DUIs in this country are very disproportional to other dangerous crimes. I know for a while in my state, you had to get two DUIs before they would even take your license away. Just a few years ago the state legislature finally passed a law that toughened up the restrictions. There's been an effort on that front in a number of states and it's long overdue. Lane Garrison. 40 months for a dui which ended in several injuries and a death. Guess he had a good lawyer or something because this to me seems more serious than what the student got. Is this a real thing or just in movies and TV? In Finland it barely makes any difference who your lawyer is in regarding the punishment. Of course there are some complicated cases, but in no case a lawyer makes a difference from 7 year to 2 years in prison. Huge difference is that the Lane Garrison guy pleaded guilty. Also, it depends on what state you're convicted in, I believe. In California, killing someone while under the influence is murder, not manslaughter. A lawyer makes a difference in the sense they are better at arguing, finding loopholes, and appealing to certain sympathies usually. Also realize Lane Garrison had $300,000 in fines.Last, if you care to investigate how the U.S. system works, the Norweigian guy more than likely will get out a few years early. He would have had a significantly less severe sentence, I presume, had he plead guilty. Would you think that an "ordinary" (poor) person would get $300,000 fine that he can never pay? (just a question, since you seem to read too much into things)
It's very possible. People get absolutely ridiculous fines that they can not hope to ever pay. I've read in the news about ordinary people who kill someone while driving and get millions in fines, and are not rich. I'm not sure how exactly it works. Basically it completely wipes out all money that the offender had.
|
so he get 35 years for no rape no roobery
no killing or to be a terrorist
thats kinda retarded
|
On April 26 2012 03:50 perser84 wrote:
so he get 35 years for no rape no roobery
no killing or to be a terrorist
thats kinda retarded
No he gets 7.5 years. Read the thread.
|
On April 26 2012 03:41 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2012 03:39 dpurple wrote:On April 26 2012 03:27 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 26 2012 03:13 dpurple wrote:On April 26 2012 02:53 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 26 2012 00:28 dpurple wrote:On April 26 2012 00:24 phoenix`down wrote:On April 26 2012 00:05 scarrow wrote:On April 25 2012 23:49 TheToast wrote:On April 25 2012 21:37 Video2000 wrote:
It does seem like Americans have a hard time dealing with criticism w regards to how their justice system works (even some of the bans/warnings so far). This is obviously an absolutely wacked out insane case, but like other people ITT have mentioned, it's not the first time to hear stories like that, nor really is it a surprise. Not trolling, it just seems like there are some issues that aren't adressed..? And we say the same things about the European justice system. Putting someone in jail for writing racist twitter posts or displaying a swastika would be completely unthinkable in the US. It's not that we support racism, but the freedom of speech is deeply entrenched in our society. The difference is that the guy who posted racist twitter remarks got a sentence of 56 days in jail. This guy has gotten 7.5 years for running over someones toe. Bit of a fucking difference. I think both sentences are ridiculously long, but to me 56 days just for writing some words seems way worse than 7.5 years for running over some limbs. He could have pretty easily killed someone, accident or not, and he is lucky he didn't. Yea, just wish those celebrities with repeated DUI's got 7.5 year in jail too. Why? Being a celebrity is irrelevant, why the stupid comments like that? A DUI is no jail time first time, possibly a few days second time, and third time it's three months (shortened from previously six months). It's handled mostly with taking away your license and imposing hefty fines. Isn't that exactly how you prefer it in Europe? Or were you just trying to do more U.S. bashing? Why is that a stupid comment? I only know how celebrities get threated in DUI cases. Because those are the people media reports about. You honestly can't see why it's stupid? Sorry that's all you see when looking at the U.S., but it's clear you're too ignorant to make any legitimate judgement, despite you trying to clearly do so anyways. Funny, you don't even know how the ordinary person is treated, but you make stupid claims anyways. :D You dont read very well do you? I compared punishment of celebrities with multiple DUI's to the punishment of this norwegian guy. I never claimed celebrities get lower punishments. And I never made any claims about any "ordinary person" either. I read it fine. There is absolutely no reason to compare punishment of celebrities in particular unless you're making a point about them specifically. That's how debates work. According to standardized tests I score in reading the top percentile, so I'm not too worried.
You are focusing on the wrong point of his argument. The problem isn't that celebrities should get more jail time for DUI's, it's that their DUI's were repeated. He only used to word celebrities because those are the repeat DUI cases you hear about, you just don't hear about the average person's DUI record that often on the news.
If instead of, "Yea, just wish those celebrities with repeated DUI's got 7.5 year in jail too," he would have said, "Yea, just wish those people with repeated DUI's got 7.5 year in jail too," would you have thrown such a fit about it?
C'mon man, if you're as good at reading as you say you are, you should be able to understand the message a statement is trying to make even if the words used to make it aren't perfect.
|
On April 26 2012 04:01 TerlocSG wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2012 03:41 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 26 2012 03:39 dpurple wrote:On April 26 2012 03:27 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 26 2012 03:13 dpurple wrote:On April 26 2012 02:53 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 26 2012 00:28 dpurple wrote:On April 26 2012 00:24 phoenix`down wrote:On April 26 2012 00:05 scarrow wrote:On April 25 2012 23:49 TheToast wrote:
[quote]
And we say the same things about the European justice system. Putting someone in jail for writing racist twitter posts or displaying a swastika would be completely unthinkable in the US. It's not that we support racism, but the freedom of speech is deeply entrenched in our society.
The difference is that the guy who posted racist twitter remarks got a sentence of 56 days in jail. This guy has gotten 7.5 years for running over someones toe. Bit of a fucking difference. I think both sentences are ridiculously long, but to me 56 days just for writing some words seems way worse than 7.5 years for running over some limbs. He could have pretty easily killed someone, accident or not, and he is lucky he didn't. Yea, just wish those celebrities with repeated DUI's got 7.5 year in jail too. Why? Being a celebrity is irrelevant, why the stupid comments like that? A DUI is no jail time first time, possibly a few days second time, and third time it's three months (shortened from previously six months). It's handled mostly with taking away your license and imposing hefty fines. Isn't that exactly how you prefer it in Europe? Or were you just trying to do more U.S. bashing? Why is that a stupid comment? I only know how celebrities get threated in DUI cases. Because those are the people media reports about. You honestly can't see why it's stupid? Sorry that's all you see when looking at the U.S., but it's clear you're too ignorant to make any legitimate judgement, despite you trying to clearly do so anyways. Funny, you don't even know how the ordinary person is treated, but you make stupid claims anyways. :D You dont read very well do you? I compared punishment of celebrities with multiple DUI's to the punishment of this norwegian guy. I never claimed celebrities get lower punishments. And I never made any claims about any "ordinary person" either. I read it fine. There is absolutely no reason to compare punishment of celebrities in particular unless you're making a point about them specifically. That's how debates work. According to standardized tests I score in reading the top percentile, so I'm not too worried. You are focusing on the wrong point of his argument. The problem isn't that celebrities should get more jail time for DUI's, it's that their DUI's were repeated. He only used to word celebrities because those are the repeat DUI cases you hear about, you just don't hear about the average person's DUI record that often on the news. If instead of, "Yea, just wish those celebrities with repeated DUI's got 7.5 year in jail too," he would have said, "Yea, just wish those people with repeated DUI's got 7.5 year in jail too," would you have thrown such a fit about it? C'mon man, if you're as good at reading as you say you are, you should be able to understand the message a statement is trying to make even if the words used to make it aren't perfect.
My entire point focused around the fact people from other countries IN THIS THREAD mention that celebrities get off easy, and thus have attributed having tons of money = you don't go to jail. If the topic of discussion is already on this matter, no, you actually cannot interchange celebrities and people and hope to have the same effect. They aren't interchangeable, simply due to the context of the existing discussion.
You can see it even in the subsequent posts, not to mention the topic of conversation in this thread had already veered towards "those with money get away with things." So no, I don't believe I was focusing on the wrong point of the argument, and at the same time, there is still no reason to mention celebrities in particular if he believes that is how the judicial system treats the general populace.
I would not have "thrown such a fit about it" if it was the second case, but I would also surmise that's still not what he meant. It seems quite clear that the entire topic of discussion was that jail time for sentences was bad.
I assume he's not actually living in Turkmenistan since he mentioned media and Turkmenistan is notorious for having some of the absolute worst censoring and media in the entire world, ranking utterly terrible in the category as human rights as well. It is ranked as having the third worst freedom of the press in the entire world, only behind North Korea and Burma. So I think it's a fairly safe assumption, although I could be wrong.
|
On April 26 2012 03:52 dpurple wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2012 03:50 perser84 wrote:
so he get 35 years for no rape no roobery
no killing or to be a terrorist
thats kinda retarded No he gets 7.5 years. Read the thread.
ok my bad but 7 years its still retarded
|
On April 26 2012 00:09 TheToast wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2012 00:05 scarrow wrote:On April 25 2012 23:49 TheToast wrote:On April 25 2012 21:37 Video2000 wrote:
It does seem like Americans have a hard time dealing with criticism w regards to how their justice system works (even some of the bans/warnings so far). This is obviously an absolutely wacked out insane case, but like other people ITT have mentioned, it's not the first time to hear stories like that, nor really is it a surprise. Not trolling, it just seems like there are some issues that aren't adressed..? And we say the same things about the European justice system. Putting someone in jail for writing racist twitter posts or displaying a swastika would be completely unthinkable in the US. It's not that we support racism, but the freedom of speech is deeply entrenched in our society. The difference is that the guy who posted racist twitter remarks got a sentence of 56 days in jail. This guy has gotten 7.5 years for running over someones toe. Bit of a fucking difference. No, he got 7 and 1/2 years for multiple counts of assault with a deadly weapon. I would argue that putting someone in jail, not matter how long, for writing racists things on twitter is much, much worse. But that's my viewpoint based on how American culture has entrenched the idea of freedom of speech.
Yeah man like America has total freedom of speech, please get real.
|
I seriously can't get my head around this. He get's 7.5 years for this? Why do I get the feeling there's more to this than we know and there's some more serious offence we are not aware of. I just cant belive this could be real. I just cant.
|
On April 26 2012 04:14 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2012 04:01 TerlocSG wrote:On April 26 2012 03:41 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 26 2012 03:39 dpurple wrote:On April 26 2012 03:27 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 26 2012 03:13 dpurple wrote:On April 26 2012 02:53 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 26 2012 00:28 dpurple wrote:On April 26 2012 00:24 phoenix`down wrote:On April 26 2012 00:05 scarrow wrote:
[quote]
The difference is that the guy who posted racist twitter remarks got a sentence of 56 days in jail.
This guy has gotten 7.5 years for running over someones toe.
Bit of a fucking difference.
I think both sentences are ridiculously long, but to me 56 days just for writing some words seems way worse than 7.5 years for running over some limbs. He could have pretty easily killed someone, accident or not, and he is lucky he didn't. Yea, just wish those celebrities with repeated DUI's got 7.5 year in jail too. Why? Being a celebrity is irrelevant, why the stupid comments like that? A DUI is no jail time first time, possibly a few days second time, and third time it's three months (shortened from previously six months). It's handled mostly with taking away your license and imposing hefty fines. Isn't that exactly how you prefer it in Europe? Or were you just trying to do more U.S. bashing? Why is that a stupid comment? I only know how celebrities get threated in DUI cases. Because those are the people media reports about. You honestly can't see why it's stupid? Sorry that's all you see when looking at the U.S., but it's clear you're too ignorant to make any legitimate judgement, despite you trying to clearly do so anyways. Funny, you don't even know how the ordinary person is treated, but you make stupid claims anyways. :D You dont read very well do you? I compared punishment of celebrities with multiple DUI's to the punishment of this norwegian guy. I never claimed celebrities get lower punishments. And I never made any claims about any "ordinary person" either. I read it fine. There is absolutely no reason to compare punishment of celebrities in particular unless you're making a point about them specifically. That's how debates work. According to standardized tests I score in reading the top percentile, so I'm not too worried. You are focusing on the wrong point of his argument. The problem isn't that celebrities should get more jail time for DUI's, it's that their DUI's were repeated. He only used to word celebrities because those are the repeat DUI cases you hear about, you just don't hear about the average person's DUI record that often on the news. If instead of, "Yea, just wish those celebrities with repeated DUI's got 7.5 year in jail too," he would have said, "Yea, just wish those people with repeated DUI's got 7.5 year in jail too," would you have thrown such a fit about it? C'mon man, if you're as good at reading as you say you are, you should be able to understand the message a statement is trying to make even if the words used to make it aren't perfect. My entire point focused around the fact people from other countries IN THIS THREAD mention that celebrities get off easy, and thus have attributed having tons of money = you don't go to jail. If the topic of discussion is already on this matter, no, you actually cannot interchange celebrities and people and hope to have the same effect. They aren't interchangeable, simply due to the context of the existing discussion. You can see it even in the subsequent posts, not to mention the topic of conversation in this thread had already veered towards "those with money get away with things." So no, I don't believe I was focusing on the wrong point of the argument, and at the same time, there is still no reason to mention celebrities in particular if he believes that is how the judicial system treats the general populace. I would not have "thrown such a fit about it" if it was the second case, but I would also surmise that's still not what he meant. It seems quite clear that the entire topic of discussion was that jail time for sentences was bad. I assume he's not actually living in Turkmenistan since he mentioned media and Turkmenistan is notorious for having some of the absolute worst censoring and media in the entire world, ranking utterly terrible in the category as human rights as well. It is ranked as having the third worst freedom of the press in the entire world, only behind North Korea and Burma. So I think it's a fairly safe assumption, although I could be wrong.
Ok, so first, the thread isn't about celebrities and the posts quoted aren't about celebrities until the guy I quoted used the word, so it still seems to me like your just throwing this thread in the wrong direction. The topic of conversation should have been about the dude that's going to jail for his really bad day.
Second, money does buy power. You can't deny that people with money can buy certain privileges that people without money cannot afford.
Third, it's still completely viable for someone who does not live in the US (or who does live in the US but has never been involved in a lawful situation) to base their opinion of the US off what they see and hear on the TV/internet, which is, as you can guess, all about celebrities. In fact, if he were to say something about normal US civilians without knowing anything about them, that would have been wrong. At least with celebrities he might have some evidence to support his argument.
And finally, "when you assume,you make an ass out of u and me." Who are you to say he doesn't live where he says he does? A completely unbiased person would have to accept his word because there's no reason to not accept it, he's innocent (of lying about where he lives) until proven guilty.
Don't be a dick because someone has an opinion that isn't yours is all I'm saying.
|
On April 26 2012 04:39 TerlocSG wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2012 04:14 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 26 2012 04:01 TerlocSG wrote:On April 26 2012 03:41 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 26 2012 03:39 dpurple wrote:On April 26 2012 03:27 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 26 2012 03:13 dpurple wrote:On April 26 2012 02:53 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 26 2012 00:28 dpurple wrote:On April 26 2012 00:24 phoenix`down wrote:
[quote]
I think both sentences are ridiculously long, but to me 56 days just for writing some words seems way worse than 7.5 years for running over some limbs. He could have pretty easily killed someone, accident or not, and he is lucky he didn't. Yea, just wish those celebrities with repeated DUI's got 7.5 year in jail too. Why? Being a celebrity is irrelevant, why the stupid comments like that? A DUI is no jail time first time, possibly a few days second time, and third time it's three months (shortened from previously six months). It's handled mostly with taking away your license and imposing hefty fines. Isn't that exactly how you prefer it in Europe? Or were you just trying to do more U.S. bashing? Why is that a stupid comment? I only know how celebrities get threated in DUI cases. Because those are the people media reports about. You honestly can't see why it's stupid? Sorry that's all you see when looking at the U.S., but it's clear you're too ignorant to make any legitimate judgement, despite you trying to clearly do so anyways. Funny, you don't even know how the ordinary person is treated, but you make stupid claims anyways. :D You dont read very well do you? I compared punishment of celebrities with multiple DUI's to the punishment of this norwegian guy. I never claimed celebrities get lower punishments. And I never made any claims about any "ordinary person" either. I read it fine. There is absolutely no reason to compare punishment of celebrities in particular unless you're making a point about them specifically. That's how debates work. According to standardized tests I score in reading the top percentile, so I'm not too worried. You are focusing on the wrong point of his argument. The problem isn't that celebrities should get more jail time for DUI's, it's that their DUI's were repeated. He only used to word celebrities because those are the repeat DUI cases you hear about, you just don't hear about the average person's DUI record that often on the news. If instead of, "Yea, just wish those celebrities with repeated DUI's got 7.5 year in jail too," he would have said, "Yea, just wish those people with repeated DUI's got 7.5 year in jail too," would you have thrown such a fit about it? C'mon man, if you're as good at reading as you say you are, you should be able to understand the message a statement is trying to make even if the words used to make it aren't perfect. My entire point focused around the fact people from other countries IN THIS THREAD mention that celebrities get off easy, and thus have attributed having tons of money = you don't go to jail. If the topic of discussion is already on this matter, no, you actually cannot interchange celebrities and people and hope to have the same effect. They aren't interchangeable, simply due to the context of the existing discussion. You can see it even in the subsequent posts, not to mention the topic of conversation in this thread had already veered towards "those with money get away with things." So no, I don't believe I was focusing on the wrong point of the argument, and at the same time, there is still no reason to mention celebrities in particular if he believes that is how the judicial system treats the general populace. I would not have "thrown such a fit about it" if it was the second case, but I would also surmise that's still not what he meant. It seems quite clear that the entire topic of discussion was that jail time for sentences was bad. I assume he's not actually living in Turkmenistan since he mentioned media and Turkmenistan is notorious for having some of the absolute worst censoring and media in the entire world, ranking utterly terrible in the category as human rights as well. It is ranked as having the third worst freedom of the press in the entire world, only behind North Korea and Burma. So I think it's a fairly safe assumption, although I could be wrong. Ok, so first, the thread isn't about celebrities and the posts quoted aren't about celebrities until the guy I quoted used the word, so it still seems to me like your just throwing this thread in the wrong direction. The topic of conversation should have been about the dude that's going to jail for his really bad day. Second, money does buy power. You can't deny that people with money can buy certain privileges that people without money cannot afford. Third, it's still completely viable for someone who does not live in the US (or who does live in the US but has never been involved in a lawful situation) to base their opinion of the US off what they see and hear on the TV/internet, which is, as you can guess, all about celebrities. In fact, if he were to say something about normal US civilians without knowing anything about them, that would have been wrong. At least with celebrities he might have some evidence to support his argument. And finally, "when you assume,you make an ass out of u and me." Who are you to say he doesn't live where he says he does? A completely unbiased person would have to accept his word because there's no reason to not accept it, he's innocent (of lying about where he lives) until proven guilty. Don't be a dick because someone has an opinion that isn't yours is all I'm saying.
Money can get you a much better defence and therefore less time...
Public defenders often have multiple cases and therefore a bigger workload. If you can afford a top notch lawyer he will be working on much fewer cases if not just yours. He will find any thing to help you whereas a public defender has much more stretched time and can't pour over every single detail of a case over and over to find small details and even if the public defender is not stretched for time the big time lawyer will usually just be better at the job in the first place.
The reason people like to US bash is because shit like this happens all the time it seems. Maybe it happens elsewhere too but I don't see any threads like these about European countries. Usually it's in the south and obviously not all of the US is like the south. I live 5 minutes from the border and most Americans I have met are fine. Americans seem to get really offended of people saying something about their country even if it not meant as an insult I've noticed. Take it easy...
|
On April 26 2012 04:39 TerlocSG wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2012 04:14 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 26 2012 04:01 TerlocSG wrote:On April 26 2012 03:41 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 26 2012 03:39 dpurple wrote:On April 26 2012 03:27 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 26 2012 03:13 dpurple wrote:On April 26 2012 02:53 FabledIntegral wrote:On April 26 2012 00:28 dpurple wrote:On April 26 2012 00:24 phoenix`down wrote:
[quote]
I think both sentences are ridiculously long, but to me 56 days just for writing some words seems way worse than 7.5 years for running over some limbs. He could have pretty easily killed someone, accident or not, and he is lucky he didn't. Yea, just wish those celebrities with repeated DUI's got 7.5 year in jail too. Why? Being a celebrity is irrelevant, why the stupid comments like that? A DUI is no jail time first time, possibly a few days second time, and third time it's three months (shortened from previously six months). It's handled mostly with taking away your license and imposing hefty fines. Isn't that exactly how you prefer it in Europe? Or were you just trying to do more U.S. bashing? Why is that a stupid comment? I only know how celebrities get threated in DUI cases. Because those are the people media reports about. You honestly can't see why it's stupid? Sorry that's all you see when looking at the U.S., but it's clear you're too ignorant to make any legitimate judgement, despite you trying to clearly do so anyways. Funny, you don't even know how the ordinary person is treated, but you make stupid claims anyways. :D You dont read very well do you? I compared punishment of celebrities with multiple DUI's to the punishment of this norwegian guy. I never claimed celebrities get lower punishments. And I never made any claims about any "ordinary person" either. I read it fine. There is absolutely no reason to compare punishment of celebrities in particular unless you're making a point about them specifically. That's how debates work. According to standardized tests I score in reading the top percentile, so I'm not too worried. You are focusing on the wrong point of his argument. The problem isn't that celebrities should get more jail time for DUI's, it's that their DUI's were repeated. He only used to word celebrities because those are the repeat DUI cases you hear about, you just don't hear about the average person's DUI record that often on the news. If instead of, "Yea, just wish those celebrities with repeated DUI's got 7.5 year in jail too," he would have said, "Yea, just wish those people with repeated DUI's got 7.5 year in jail too," would you have thrown such a fit about it? C'mon man, if you're as good at reading as you say you are, you should be able to understand the message a statement is trying to make even if the words used to make it aren't perfect. My entire point focused around the fact people from other countries IN THIS THREAD mention that celebrities get off easy, and thus have attributed having tons of money = you don't go to jail. If the topic of discussion is already on this matter, no, you actually cannot interchange celebrities and people and hope to have the same effect. They aren't interchangeable, simply due to the context of the existing discussion. You can see it even in the subsequent posts, not to mention the topic of conversation in this thread had already veered towards "those with money get away with things." So no, I don't believe I was focusing on the wrong point of the argument, and at the same time, there is still no reason to mention celebrities in particular if he believes that is how the judicial system treats the general populace. I would not have "thrown such a fit about it" if it was the second case, but I would also surmise that's still not what he meant. It seems quite clear that the entire topic of discussion was that jail time for sentences was bad. I assume he's not actually living in Turkmenistan since he mentioned media and Turkmenistan is notorious for having some of the absolute worst censoring and media in the entire world, ranking utterly terrible in the category as human rights as well. It is ranked as having the third worst freedom of the press in the entire world, only behind North Korea and Burma. So I think it's a fairly safe assumption, although I could be wrong. Ok, so first, the thread isn't about celebrities and the posts quoted aren't about celebrities until the guy I quoted used the word, so it still seems to me like your just throwing this thread in the wrong direction. The topic of conversation should have been about the dude that's going to jail for his really bad day. Second, money does buy power. You can't deny that people with money can buy certain privileges that people without money cannot afford. Third, it's still completely viable for someone who does not live in the US (or who does live in the US but has never been involved in a lawful situation) to base their opinion of the US off what they see and hear on the TV/internet, which is, as you can guess, all about celebrities. In fact, if he were to say something about normal US civilians without knowing anything about them, that would have been wrong. At least with celebrities he might have some evidence to support his argument. And finally, "when you assume,you make an ass out of u and me." Who are you to say he doesn't live where he says he does? A completely unbiased person would have to accept his word because there's no reason to not accept it, he's innocent (of lying about where he lives) until proven guilty. Don't be a dick because someone has an opinion that isn't yours is all I'm saying.
1. You're right, the thread isn't about celebrities. That doesn't mean they aren't being brought up in relevant, albeit incorrect, discussions. What was just being discussed were comments like these
"On April 25 2012 10:06 wurm wrote:
I'm honestly not surprised. Celebrities can kill/threaten to kill people/embezzle millions and not spend any jail time in America, but the average Joe can spend up to a decade in jail for what other people get 1-2 years minimum. Justice system my ass.
2. Yes, money can buy power, I agree.
3. Sure, it's viable. What's your point? I'm not sure the word you're looking for is viable.
4. Assumptions are quite key when other evidence is lacking. Without assumptions there's hardly any discussion because the facts are almost never presented. As long as you make it clear you're assuming and that you're not stating how things are, I don't see an issue with that.
|
Are you the defenders of America really supportive of this kids sentencing and our Judicial system in general, or are you simply expressing Patriotic/Nationalistic sentiment? Does having a prison population larger then fucking Communist China really seem befitting of "the land of the free"?
Because if its the latter, you aren't Patriotic. You are actively harming your country by expressing disgenuine viewpoints to save face.
If its the former, you might be kind of dumb, sorry.
As for the kid involved, I feel pity for him. He really did seem like he was born a loser Obviously shouldn't be going to prison, but given his luck, not surprising :/.
|
On April 26 2012 05:19 Half wrote:
Are you the defenders of America really supportive of this kids sentencing and our Judicial system in general, or are you simply expressing Patriotic/Nationalistic sentiment? Does having a prison population larger then fucking Communist China really seem befitting of "the land of the free"?
Because if its the latter, you aren't Patriotic. You are actively harming your country by expressing disgenuine viewpoints to save face.
If its the former, you might be kind of dumb, sorry :/.
From reading the topic, I believe a very large majority of the posters from the U.S. would think that the 7.5 year sentence is indeed excessive, but that hasn't really been debated or a while. What has been debated was how the person was acting, and how he deserves more than a simple slap on the wrist. More notably than anything probably was the extreme bias in the article.
|
Baltimore, USA22250 Posts
OP has done a shitty (non-existent) job of updating the OP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
