Comment Re:So while all of this was happening (Score 1) 798
A person that rationalizes the abuse of another by blaming the victim pretty much is the definition of a sociopath, by your own reasoning - lack of emotional inhibition.
A person that rationalizes the abuse of another by blaming the victim pretty much is the definition of a sociopath, by your own reasoning - lack of emotional inhibition.
What you *should* find interesting is that this guy knows a metric crap-ton more than you do about the history of the Constitution, and maybe your opinion is like a second grader giving advice to NASA about how to construct their next heavy lift vehicle.
I do not oppose personal ownership of firearms, but I find it really arrogant for armchair legal history scholars (read: ignoramuses) to try to foist their particular skew on history.
Let the real scholars hash out what it's supposed to mean. We can then decide whether we want to amend that.
Me so sorry, Masa! Oh lordy lord, how dare ah step out of mah place 'n quweshtun authoritah! Puh-leeze don't whup me, Masa! I'll never roam ag'in!
You know what I find arrogant? Armchair character assassins, who don't know me from Adam, assuming that I have less understanding of American history than the next guy.
I don't see how this is "ignoring the traditional definition of the term militia".
Traditionally, the term has been defined as "an army or other fighting force that is composed of non-professional fighters; citizens of a nation or subjects of a state or government that can be called upon to enter a combat situation, as opposed to a professional force of regular, full-time military personnel." - Wikipedia
So, either he's trying to redefine the term to mean "only those serving active duty in governmental military units," or he doesn't think disabled people should have access to weapons.
I wish.
As nice as it might be to generate revenue for myself by posting submissions, reading the comments as we wax philosophic on the issue is all the satisfaction I need.
not news for nerds
Because there's no such thing as a nerd who likes guns, right?
not stuff that matters
Because nothing matters less than fascists trying to limit our civil liberties, right?
however it does drive click revenue to feature a hot button culture war issue.
Whatever you've got to tell yourself. Nobody's putting a gun to your head and forcing you to come here and "drive click revenue.' Start your own news website if you don't like the stories we, the Slashdot community, choose to display.
Not everyone in the classroom took part in the activity which could be defined as assault, conspiracy to commit assault, or even accessory to assault. So, not everyone being recorded without their permission was committing a crime during the recording.
Failure to report a crime is a crime in itself.
If the same behavior occurred between two adults, the perps would be going to jail. It might be time to start adding that little life lesson to high schools.
When I went to high school. The spineless swine who get to be school administrators *always* punish the victims of bullying, not the perpetrators (usually, the popular kids or athletes). The victim is just one kid, usually powerless, who will be out of their life in a few years. The families of the perps are many, and they're often as dangerously aggressive as their spawn.
Also:
"We can't put Jimmy Quarterback in detention, he wouldn't be able to play in next week's Big Game®! Which is way, way, more important than academics, since we rely on the Booster money his athletics bring in!"
Let us not forget the 3rd common thing authorities bring up, "well, you are acting XYZ so it is your own fault".
I think the new way of saying that is, "well, you're just so pick-on-able."
A phrase which sets off every "that guy's a sociopath" alarm in my brain.
The other thing is that the Pennsylvania law also has an exception that states that you do not need to permission of someone who is committing a crime in the recording. That would not have applied in this case since not all of those being recorded were committing a crime
Assault, conspiracy to commit assault, and accessory to assault very much are crimes.
Just so you know, "assault" is legally defined as the threat of harm, not the actual commission of it; that would be "battery."
I'm going to play devil's advocate here because I read the article to see what event had transpired.
Necessity typically requires three tests to be a valid defense, the defendent needs to be breaking the law to avoid a significant risk of harm, there were no adequate lawful means to address the situation, and the harm avoided was greater than the harm caused by breaking the law. The problem in this situation is the second one. The problem is that neither of the articles suggested that any other steps were taken to stop the bullying prior to committing the recording. That's the problem. There's no suggestion that the boy told his mother about the bullying, there's no suggestion that the mother contacted the school about the bullying before the recording was made.
You really think telling his mother would have addressed the situation, in a way that would not increase the likelihood of the boy coming to harm? You've apparently never tangled with a bully; I can hear the aftermath already:
"Aww, did the little pussy have to go cryin' to his mommy? Here, little pussy, I'll give you something to cry about!"
Been there, done that, got the tshirt (which a bully subsequently destroyed).
I have the exact same ad!
Wow, feels like foreshadowing...
Why? Are you planning on killing a bunch of people with an AR-15?
I think the word you're looking for, rather than foreshadowing, is "coincidence."
Or maybe "irony," depending on your sense of humor.
The Amnesic Operating System.
Shouldn't it be amnesiac?
Nope - an amnesiac is a noun that refers to a person suffering from amnesia; "amnesic" is an adjective that means "exhibits properties of amnesia," which can apply to more than just the human psyche.
Don't panic.
