42 Replies. 3 pages. Viewing page 2.
Newer [  1  2  3  ] Older
22.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jul 30, 2014, 17:51
Jivaro
 
22.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jul 30, 2014, 17:51
Jul 30, 2014, 17:51
 Jivaro
 
jdreyer wrote on Jul 30, 2014, 17:49:
Jivaro wrote on Jul 30, 2014, 17:13:
I don't know about the electric chair but I do think our legal system is entirely too lite on animals like the person who did this to her.

Yes, but share a few things on the internets and you'll be threatened with $10s of millions in fines and 35 years in jail.

IKR? Priorities...
Avatar 55841
21.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jul 30, 2014, 17:49
21.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jul 30, 2014, 17:49
Jul 30, 2014, 17:49
 
Jivaro wrote on Jul 30, 2014, 17:13:
I don't know about the electric chair but I do think our legal system is entirely too lite on animals like the person who did this to her.

Yes, but share a few things on the internets and you'll be threatened with $10s of millions in fines and 35 years in jail.
To prevent CV-19, avoid the Serious Seven: weddings, funerals, faith-based activities, bars, gyms, house gatherings and other small events.
Avatar 22024
20.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jul 30, 2014, 17:13
Jivaro
 
20.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jul 30, 2014, 17:13
Jul 30, 2014, 17:13
 Jivaro
 
Technically, yes, a brain injury. It was termed as "bleeding on the brain" in the article I read. Whether that is from blunt force trauma or being shaken I have no idea. Either way it sucks.

I also noticed in an updated article that she apparently has no recollection of the events from the night. Whether that's from a concussion or from some sort of drugging...or both...is not listed.

I don't know about the electric chair but I do think our legal system is entirely too lite on animals like the person who did this to her.
Avatar 55841
19.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jul 30, 2014, 17:04
19.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jul 30, 2014, 17:04
Jul 30, 2014, 17:04
 
Jivaro wrote on Jul 30, 2014, 15:48:
Chick was beaten, has a brain injury

She has a brain injury??

Fuck putting that guy in jail, make him fry on the fucking electric chair.
Avatar 15604
18.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jul 30, 2014, 17:00
Jivaro
 
18.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jul 30, 2014, 17:00
Jul 30, 2014, 17:00
 Jivaro
 
And all of that would be true except nobody here has all the facts and yet the main point of the thread still starts with what the victim did or didn't do.

I just find it troubling on many levels. I am not saying that anybody here condones what happened to her. I am not even saying anybody is truly victim blaming/shaming. People want to discuss it, fine. I am just noticing how "education" comes first and "sympathy" comes second in the conversation....and it's a bit sad from my point of view. For all we know she did absolutely nothing wrong or "high risk" and still fell victim to some asshole. "Ran off" is very vague. If I "run off" to the bathroom shouldn't I feel fairly safe? Not enough info for "education", at least I don't have enough info. Obviously you folks feel differently and I can respect that because I don't think it comes out of some sort of negative place. I guess I just process it differently.

This comment was edited on Jul 30, 2014, 17:53.
Avatar 55841
17.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jul 30, 2014, 16:07
Verno
 
17.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jul 30, 2014, 16:07
Jul 30, 2014, 16:07
 Verno
 
Jivaro wrote on Jul 30, 2014, 15:48:
It will always boggle my mind this instant reflex or need that people seem to have....when they hear someone has been beaten or raped or whatever...to firstly ask "what did they do to make themselves a target". Blows my mind every time. As if it matters.

Why do you assume everyone is coming at it from that angle? Humans are iterative, we learn by example. We're also inherently curious. People often want to know because that's how we learn. It might be crass but its important. The circumstances absolutely matter, just not for the reasons you seem to think.

Edit: beaten by NKD
Playing: Ys VIII, Hades, Demons Souls
Watching: The Expanse, Tenet, Peninsula
Avatar 51617
16.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jul 30, 2014, 15:59
NKD
16.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jul 30, 2014, 15:59
Jul 30, 2014, 15:59
NKD
 
Jivaro wrote on Jul 30, 2014, 15:48:
It will always boggle my mind this instant reflex or need that people seem to have....when they hear someone has been beaten or raped or whatever...to firstly ask "what did they do to make themselves a target". Blows my mind every time. As if it matters.

It's not about blaming her or whatever, it's about using the situation to teach others. It seems to me this is exactly the kind of situation that reinforces the need to educate people on the buddy system and safety in numbers when attending events.

This could happen to anyone, not just teens, not just girls. EVERYONE needs to take basic safety precautions at these types of events.

It matters. If a little education can prevent more people from being victimized, it absolutely matters.
Judging the health of the economy based on your 401k is like judging the quality of your furniture based on your coffin.
Avatar 43041
15.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jul 30, 2014, 15:48
Jivaro
 
15.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jul 30, 2014, 15:48
Jul 30, 2014, 15:48
 Jivaro
 
It will always boggle my mind this instant reflex or need that people seem to have....when they hear someone has been beaten or raped or whatever...to firstly ask "what did they do to make themselves a target". Blows my mind every time. As if it matters.

Chick was beaten, has a brain injury and people are trying to discuss how she made it possible for that to happen. It's beyond stupid. It's kinda gross. As Creston said, I hope that if the guy they arrested is indeed the culprit he is put away for a very long time.
Avatar 55841
14.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jul 30, 2014, 14:49
14.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jul 30, 2014, 14:49
Jul 30, 2014, 14:49
 
All blablabla aside, this is a fucking terrible thing to happen to that girl, (yes, she probably should have been more careful, no, that doesn't make what happened to her okay) and if they arrested the guy who actually did it, I hope his ass gets treated ungently in jail for the next thirty years.
Avatar 15604
13.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jul 30, 2014, 14:37
NKD
13.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jul 30, 2014, 14:37
Jul 30, 2014, 14:37
NKD
 
Beamer wrote on Jul 30, 2014, 14:26:
I don't know. A lot of people think of rape as being a crime of physically overwhelming someone. They think of rapists as being a guy in a dark park waiting for some jogger to run by.

Well, lacking any more details, this does seem to fall more into that category. Of course we don't know if she was raped, or what, but she was certainly attacked and beaten. This obviously wasn't a case of some drunken college students being dumbasses. That usually doesn't end in a girl bloody and unconscious on a street with no ID.

There isn't any legal gray area regarding beating some girl and leaving her in the street, so I think that discussion is a bit of a sidetrack.
Judging the health of the economy based on your 401k is like judging the quality of your furniture based on your coffin.
Avatar 43041
12.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jul 30, 2014, 14:26
Beamer
 
12.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jul 30, 2014, 14:26
Jul 30, 2014, 14:26
 Beamer
 
I don't know. A lot of people think of rape as being a crime of physically overwhelming someone. They think of rapists as being a guy in a dark park waiting for some jogger to run by.

They don't think of what they do to a friend in a dorm room as rape. There's a case in Seattle here like that now. The guy kept badgering the girl, she kept saying no, finally she was worn down and somewhat consented, but as soon as he had her pants of she said no again, and kept saying no. The guy admits all of this, but is saying he didn't really think about it, because she said yes, and he wasn't really paying attention to her after that (which, frankly, almost sounds like parody.)

That's rape. He didn't think it was. The school is trying to figure out if it is.

Hell, I remember in law school finding out that a drunk person can't consent. Many states have this as a gender-specific law, but many are changing it. If someone is pass out drunk and consents to sex, then regrets it, it can be construed as rape. The law isn't well written, because, as mentioned, it's often gender specific, and it rarely takes into account if both parties are drunk beyond consent, but this was something my class, myself included, had an enormous amount of time wrapping our heads around because it seemed counter-intuitive, but yes, if you meet someone at a bar or party, they're so drunk they can barely walk, and they bring you home to have sex with them, that can be rape.
11.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jul 30, 2014, 14:19
NKD
11.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jul 30, 2014, 14:19
Jul 30, 2014, 14:19
NKD
 
Beamer wrote on Jul 30, 2014, 13:57:
Well, the whole thing with "rape culture" is that you hear so much about what women should do to avoid being raped, but you rarely hear a guy being told "don't rape."

I rarely hear people being told not to murder other people either. But they still, in general, don't do it. Pretending men need education that rape is wrong is giving these fuckers a free pass. They know damn well its wrong. As does every guy who isn't a sociopath. With the exception of bumfuck Africa where some voodoo witchdoctor is telling everyone raping a virgin cures AIDS, rape isn't about ignorance or culture it's about being a shitty human being.

Yes, there are some things you can do that are stupid. If you drink, drive, and crash into a tree, you're stupid and your actions led to your suffering. If you go out to a bar, don't drink, drive home at 1:30 am and are hit by a drunk driver, yes, you could have avoided the roads when a significant portion of drivers are drunk, but does that mean that you deserve blame?

While it's statistically less safe to be driving in such a situation, there's not much you can do to avoid it other than just hiding in your house and forgoing a night out with friends.

Here's two different scenarios:

You're hit by a drunk driver, you weren't wearing your seatbelt.
You're hit by a drunk driver, you were out at 1:30AM and there were more drunk drivers on the street.

In the first scenario, you failed to take a basic safety precaution. You weren't being oppressed or discriminated against by being encouraged to wear a seatbelt. It's okay to expect people to take basic precautions to ensure their own safety.

In the second scenario, you took basic safety precautions. The only thing you could have done to avoid it is to refrain from taking part in a perfectly normal activity. It's NOT okay to expect people to refrain from their normal day to day behaviors, or avoid having fun, because it's technically more risky.

This girl may have had sexual relations with a 29 year old at Comicon. And she may have then ended up beaten and bloody in a street. One of those does not inherently lead to the other. I'll wager more than a handful of guys here have ended up at a strange location having sex with someone they only just met. It didn't end up with them bloody in a street.

So to relate this girls situation to my previous example. It's okay to expect her to take basic precautions like distrusting strangers and sticking with a group. I try to take these same precautions at cons and sporting events and I am a large, strong male. It's NOT okay to expect her to dress conservatively or forgo attendance at the event entirely.

One is a needless risk taking behavior that can be avoided without much trouble. The other isn't a significant risk factor and would place undue burden on the girl to avoid.

It's not black & white bro. Hiding in your house to avoid dying in a car accident is stupid, wearing your seatbelt to avoid dying in a car accident is smart.
Judging the health of the economy based on your 401k is like judging the quality of your furniture based on your coffin.
Avatar 43041
10.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jul 30, 2014, 13:57
Beamer
 
10.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jul 30, 2014, 13:57
Jul 30, 2014, 13:57
 Beamer
 
NKD wrote on Jul 30, 2014, 13:40:
Beamer wrote on Jul 30, 2014, 13:31:

Moral of the post doesn't seem to be "hey, guys, don't beat 17 year old girls and leave them bloody in the street," but "hey, 17 year old girls, don't have fun skimpily dressed with your friends at a place full of skimpily dressed people because some guy may beat you."

Yeah, seems that way. I'm all for personal responsibility. I think this girl did make a shitty decision, not that it excuses this guys behavior, but lets at least point out the decision she made that actually put her at risk. Instead of the one that doesn't comport with conservative values regarding sexuality.

How do you avoid getting fucked over at a major event? SAFETY IN NUMBERS. You can be wearing fucking pasties and a Tribble from Star Trek over your snatch and be perfectly safe at a con, as long as you stay in a group. Or you could be wearing normal street clothes and end up a victim because you weren't in a group.

Women are much more likely to be victimized by strangers on the street. It's a simple fact. What they are wearing doesn't really swing that statistic at all. Where they are, and the fact that they are alone accounts for all the risk.

Well, the whole thing with "rape culture" is that you hear so much about what women should do to avoid being raped, but you rarely hear a guy being told "don't rape."

Yes, there are some things you can do that are stupid. If you drink, drive, and crash into a tree, you're stupid and your actions led to your suffering. If you go out to a bar, don't drink, drive home at 1:30 am and are hit by a drunk driver, yes, you could have avoided the roads when a significant portion of drivers are drunk, but does that mean that you deserve blame?

This girl may have had sexual relations with a 29 year old at Comicon. And she may have then ended up beaten and bloody in a street. One of those does not inherently lead to the other. I'll wager more than a handful of guys here have ended up at a strange location having sex with someone they only just met. It didn't end up with them bloody in a street.
9.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jul 30, 2014, 13:40
NKD
9.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jul 30, 2014, 13:40
Jul 30, 2014, 13:40
NKD
 
Beamer wrote on Jul 30, 2014, 13:31:

Moral of the post doesn't seem to be "hey, guys, don't beat 17 year old girls and leave them bloody in the street," but "hey, 17 year old girls, don't have fun skimpily dressed with your friends at a place full of skimpily dressed people because some guy may beat you."

Yeah, seems that way. I'm all for personal responsibility. I think this girl did make a shitty decision, not that it excuses this guys behavior, but lets at least point out the decision she made that actually put her at risk. Instead of the one that doesn't comport with conservative values regarding sexuality.

How do you avoid getting fucked over at a major event? SAFETY IN NUMBERS. You can be wearing fucking pasties and a Tribble from Star Trek over your snatch and be perfectly safe at a con, as long as you stay in a group. Or you could be wearing normal street clothes and end up a victim because you weren't in a group.

Women are much more likely to be victimized by strangers on the street. It's a simple fact. What they are wearing doesn't really swing that statistic at all. Where they are, and the fact that they are alone accounts for all the risk.
Judging the health of the economy based on your 401k is like judging the quality of your furniture based on your coffin.
Avatar 43041
8.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jul 30, 2014, 13:31
Beamer
 
8.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jul 30, 2014, 13:31
Jul 30, 2014, 13:31
 Beamer
 
NKD wrote on Jul 30, 2014, 13:23:
Eirikrautha wrote on Jul 30, 2014, 13:17:
But hey, what's the worst that could happen?

I don't know about you, but I don't make decisions based on the "worst that could happen." I make decisions based on "what's most within the realm of possibility." The worst that could happen is I die or am permanently injured. The problem is that's the "worst that could happen" for literally everything I do.

If you cannot show that a decision significantly increases your chances of a negative consequence, you cannot call it bad judgement. A cosplayer, particularly one who doesn't go hang out in an alley by herself or run off with some strange guy, is safer at Comic Con than you are driving to work. There simply isn't any data to show that cosplayers are at a significantly higher risk of assault than the general populous.

Dressing slutty = Possibly distasteful depending on the context and your morality, but not poor judgement.

Running off by yourself during a major event = VERY poor judgement.

The fact that you chose to skirt that particular point with empty rhetoric doesn't do you any favors either.

Moral of the post doesn't seem to be "hey, guys, don't beat 17 year old girls and leave them bloody in the street," but "hey, 17 year old girls, don't have fun skimpily dressed with your friends at a place full of skimpily dressed people because some guy may beat you."
7.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jul 30, 2014, 13:23
NKD
7.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jul 30, 2014, 13:23
Jul 30, 2014, 13:23
NKD
 
Eirikrautha wrote on Jul 30, 2014, 13:17:
But hey, what's the worst that could happen?

I don't know about you, but I don't make decisions based on the "worst that could happen." I make decisions based on "what's most within the realm of possibility." The worst that could happen is I die or am permanently injured. The problem is that's the "worst that could happen" for literally everything I do.

If you cannot show that a decision significantly increases your chances of a negative consequence, you cannot call it bad judgement. A cosplayer, particularly one who doesn't go hang out in an alley by herself or run off with some strange guy, is safer at Comic Con than you are driving to work. There simply isn't any data to show that cosplayers are at a significantly higher risk of assault than the general populous.

Dressing slutty = Possibly distasteful depending on the context and your morality, but not poor judgement.

Running off by yourself during a major event = VERY poor judgement.

The fact that you chose to skirt that particular point with empty rhetoric doesn't do you any favors either.
Judging the health of the economy based on your 401k is like judging the quality of your furniture based on your coffin.
Avatar 43041
6.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jul 30, 2014, 13:17
6.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jul 30, 2014, 13:17
Jul 30, 2014, 13:17
 
NKD wrote on Jul 30, 2014, 12:49:
I wasn't aware that a 17 year old wearing a skimpy cosplay outfit to a major con was bad judgement.

Well, then, we both learned something today!

Unfortunately, how you dress does affect the way people treat you, especially if you are young, alone, and vulnerable. I don't expect most kids to think about these things. But it's a lot easier to learn that from the adults around you than it is from a hospital stay. But hey, what's the worst that could happen?
5.
 
removed
Jul 30, 2014, 13:11
5.
removed Jul 30, 2014, 13:11
Jul 30, 2014, 13:11
 
* REMOVED *
This comment was deleted on Jul 30, 2014, 15:57.
4.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jul 30, 2014, 12:49
NKD
4.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jul 30, 2014, 12:49
Jul 30, 2014, 12:49
NKD
 
Eirikrautha wrote on Jul 30, 2014, 11:50:
Ehh, that's probably too harsh (not knowing all of the particulars). Still, someone exhibited bad judgement here, and I have a hard time blaming a kid for it (because that's the definition of kid). Too bad other folks weren't looking out for her, too.

I wasn't aware that a 17 year old wearing a skimpy cosplay outfit to a major con was bad judgement. Hindsight is 20/20, but generally speaking it's a pretty safe activity to partake in, compared to other activities 17 year olds get up to. It's not like cosplayers are found bloody and unconscious in the streets in any significant numbers.

Some cat calls, creepshots, and staring? To be expected. Beaten and blooded in the street? Not a likely foreseeable outcome.

From what we've heard so far, her only mistake was running off by herself and not sticking with friends. That's a bad thing to do at a major event regardless of what you're wearing or what's between your legs. I got robbed outside a Seahawks away game one time and I'm a fairly intimidating male. If I had been with 4 or 5 other people, I doubt a lone guy would have stepped to me with a knife.
Judging the health of the economy based on your 401k is like judging the quality of your furniture based on your coffin.
Avatar 43041
3.
 
Re: Morning Legal Briefs
Jul 30, 2014, 12:41
3.
Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jul 30, 2014, 12:41
Jul 30, 2014, 12:41
 
are people allowed to say "dressing provocatively at large gatherings might be dangerous" or is that too close to "she was asking for it"

btw, where are the polygon articles about how showing tons of tits and ass in cosplay is totally non-sexual and non-objectifying, and instead liberates women from the tyranny of phallus-obsessed male society
42 Replies. 3 pages. Viewing page 2.
Newer [  1  2  3  ] Older