She is freaking clueless
I do not believe she is clueless at all.
I do believe she is evil as all Hell.
May she return to the pit in which she was spawned.
She is freaking clueless
Kind of thinking Spawned is really putting it too nicely. Fairly confident she is indeed an evil self serving narcissist.I do not believe she is clueless at all.
I do believe she is evil as all Hell.
May she return to the pit in which she was spawned.
So we can expect a trial for the Nashville shooter then so we can officially call her a murderer?No, we cannot skip the process, not even when we really want to.
No, because she was stopped mid-violent act.So we can expect a trial for the Nashville shooter then so we can officially call her a murderer?
No, because she was stopped mid-violent act.
There's a monumental difference between
- Stopping violent A-hole in the middle of a violent act and
- Lynching someone after a crime has been claimed to have been committed just on the basis of an accusation.
Due process and presumption of innocence are corner stones to a free society. If you want evidence of what happens when we remove it, just see how claims on college campuses are handled:
Students of all stripes have had their names drug through the mud and deprived of the education and opportunities that they paid a mortgage for... All because of unsubstantiated claims and no ability to confront accusers, denial of representation, etc, etc
You might say "well who cares about college" but the real question is that after seeing what a train-wreck shadow-processing has been on Title IX claims, do you really want to extend that to society at large?
While we're on the topi of this particular incendiary accusation and due process... what's really confusing to me is people I have known (offline) who believe that we should actively sympathize with rapists, rehabilitate, and reroll the dice by releasing them into society but also think that because rape convictions are hard to secure that we shouldn't be concerned with all that due process nonsense. I don't know how a person comes to that as a "yeah, that makes sense" policy.
Understanding the purple , but to many on the left she (it) whatever is being labeled as a victim, which is the biggest load of horse crap I have ever seen.But we must adhere to the “innocent until proven guilty “
without a trial she will always be innocent.
Yep. Because a crisis counselor should have been sent in to talk to her.Understanding the purple , but to many on the left she (it) whatever is being labeled as a victim, which is the biggest load of horse crap I have ever seen.
once again I do not believe in dismissing the foundation of our legal system, although many in power already have and we are in a post constitutional society, I refuse to accept we can not call it the monster it was. And we must afford it the benefit of the doubt because of a lack of a conviction.
Today lives remain forever changed, for some a void has been created that will never be filled . As I scroll through various sources, I remain in dismay with the fact Evil is allowed to rear its ugly head. Read most any article and you will note the author’s statement of suspect, or alleged shooter. Understanding law dictates that someone is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. I am absent any explanation as to why we need to protect a monster and not call them out for what they were?
Rant off
Baltimore? Isn't it bad enough there already?I do not believe she is clueless at all.
I do believe she is evil as all Hell.
May she return to the pit in which she was spawned.
Well I am all for it. Let the trial begin I think there would be a lot to be gained in doing so. Things would come out motives would be made public etc.The fact that we do not put the dead on trial means that "alleged" is the correct legal term.
Even though we have solid evidence, from a manifesto, from postings, from security video, from witnesses, from body cams, from the corpses... There will never be a trial for that evidence to be judged, by a jury, to be "proof". With no proof, there will never be a conviction. They will always remain "alleged".
The bleeding hearts that are already calling her a victim would lose their fashizzle. They'd call it abuse.Well I am all for it. Let the trial begin I think there would be a lot to be gained in doing so. Things would come out motives would be made public etc.
I am not going to Lie I would be fine with that, but then again I have twisted world views where a monster is not a victim.The bleeding hearts that are already calling her a victim would lose their fashizzle. They'd call it abuse.
Guessing you have missed my point repeatedly."Innocent until proven guilty" is a legal concept, and we should be grateful for it. It dates back to the Salem witch trials where women were accused of being witches and had to prove they weren't or be executed. Of course the process of proving they weren't witches usually killed them anyway. Years later people realized the folly of what they had done and asserted the presumption of innocence and put the burden of proof on the state. It doesn't change anything in the minds of non-lawyers anyway. No history book claims that John Wilkes Booth was the "alleged" assassin of Abraham Lincoln even though he never had his day in court.
Then don't.Disagree if you will but I can not refer to It as alleged or suspect .
The concept of due process, and its corollary of innocence until proven guilty, are moot in circumstances such as the Nashville Shooter. One does not engage in a legal process requiring due process or the presumption of innocence when acting in justified self-defense in response to an ongoing, active, lethal threat. The attacker's actions resulted in and led directly to the use of deadly force in self-defense, to stop the lethal actions of the attacker.Well I was kind of referring absolutes such as the piece of fecal matter in Nashville. There was no question regarding its guilt no gray area not even a remote chance that there was any question of its actions.
You said, "I think my point has been lost on this one? I am not asking for to declare someone guilty of a crime with out it being adjudicated. I am asking why we need to call a deceased monster an alleged shooter, or suspect."Guessing you have missed my point repeatedly.