I'd encourage everyone to chip in a few bucks for this young man's defense.
Wrong again.2nd degree manslaughter is not an egregious charge - it's literally in place for this exact event. He choked out and accidentally killed a non-violent (NYPD's own words) passenger. Being unruly does not justify a death penalty, and as such this guy is being charged with the appropriate crime.
Because the jury didn't rule that he was guilty does not mean it was an egregious charge. It was a tough case to be a juror on - he clearly accidentally killed the guy, and it's unfortunate he was placed in that position. I'll respect this verdict, just like I'll respect any others that come out that I may not personally agree with.Wrong again.
Your worldview has collapsed the last year
So you're replying here so everyone knows you disagree with the verdict. Why is that?Because the jury didn't rule that he was guilty does not mean it was an egregious charge. It was a tough case to be a juror on - he clearly accidentally killed the guy, and it's unfortunate he was placed in that position. I'll respect this verdict, just like I'll respect any others that come out that I may not personally agree with.
I'm responding to someone who quoted me yesterday, you dullard.So you're replying here so everyone knows you disagree with the verdict. Why is that?
I'm responding to someone who quoted me yesterday, you dullard.
Chill...so you do or do not agree with the decision?Because the jury didn't rule that he was guilty does not mean it was an egregious charge. It was a tough case to be a juror on - he clearly accidentally killed the guy, and it's unfortunate he was placed in that position. I'll respect this verdict, just like I'll respect any others that come out that I may not personally agree with.
I, personally, disagree with the verdict. You can see it in the sentence you bolded.Chill...so you do or do not agree with the decision?
Why Elvis?Liberalism is a mental disorder.
I'm going to ignore your appeal to emotion argument, since that's not relevant to the situation. Do I think a mentally unwell person deserves to be killed because he's having a breakdown? No, I don't. I'd expect someone who claims to be "pro-life" to share these sentiments. Penny ACCIDENTALLY killed someone. There's a reason manslaughter charges exist - it's for the accidental/non-malicious killing of people. I don't believe that people have the right to kill people, whether accidentally or on purpose, and as such I disagree with the verdict.Actually, you did not say this, but yes it can be inferred.
So, your daughter is on that train, along with elderly people. I man on this train is yelling obscenities and is obviously not in the right frame of mind. Then he continues to yell out that he is going to kill someone and doesn't care if he goes to jail.
Another man takes it upon himself to de-escalate the situation, so that no one feels in danger for their life.
In your mind, how is this the wrong verdict? I'm just trying to understand the logic.
I can see your point, but I also believe that the extenuating circumstance by the perpetrator has to play a role in the nature of the killing. Albeit an accident, the perpetrator was putting the fear of bodily harm and death to everyone on that train. This is the part you are not taking into account!I'm going to ignore your appeal to emotion argument, since that's not relevant to the situation. Do I think a mentally unwell person deserves to be killed because he's having a breakdown? No, I don't. I'd expect someone who claims to be "pro-life" to share these sentiments. Penny ACCIDENTALLY killed someone. There's a reason manslaughter charges exist - it's for the accidental/non-malicious killing of people. I don't believe that people have the right to kill people, whether accidentally or on purpose, and as such I disagree with the verdict.
Had he restrained Neely without murder, i'd have been opposed to any charges of assault/battery because he was doing it for the public good. That changes when someone's life gets taken - IN MY OPINION.
The problem is the verdict promotes vigilantism. If he had been brandishing a weapon and actually caused harm, then I'd be more sympathetic to Perry's situation. However, he wasn't, and didn't, and as such was strangled to death by an individual with no authority to do so.I can see your point, but I also believe that the extenuating circumstance by the perpetrator has to play a role in the nature of the killing. Albeit an accident, the perpetrator was putting the fear of bodily harm and death to everyone on that train. This is the part you are not taking into account!
We can disagree, I just wanted to get your logic, even though flawed as it is.
Apparently he did have the authority to do so. The authority was given by the people of the jury.The problem is the verdict promotes vigilantism. If he had been brandishing a weapon and actually caused harm, then I'd be more sympathetic to Perry's situation. However, he wasn't, and didn't, and as such was strangled to death by an individual with no authority to do so.
Tacit authority != rational-legal authority. The irony of the "pro life" party getting off on vigilantism and murder is not lost on me. It's all so incredibly hypocritical, but that's the post intellectual world we live in today.Apparently he did have the authority to do so. The authority was given by the people of the jury.
They spoke loud and clear.
And make no mistake, that idiot threatened to kill people.
I’m not pro life.Tacit authority != rational-legal authority. The irony of the "pro life" party getting off on vigilantism and murder is not lost on me. It's all so incredibly hypocritical, but that's the post intellectual world we live in today.
Yes, the gov't did fail him. Mental health in our country is drastically underfunded, and I wish there was more done to take care of the mentally unwell. A guy having a mental break who didn't harm anyone doesn't deserve to be killed. The threat of action doesn't warrant capital punishment. We're going to just have to agree to disagree on this, because i'd rather stop having the conversation with you because I find your whole POV gross and I don't think you're a very decent human being.I’m not pro life.
The guy was a crazed lunatic asshole that threatened kill people. He got what he deserved.
The blame should be placed on NY for letting that crazed lunatic get that far off the deep end. Get him to a mental hospital and off the streets. The people of NY failed two people here. Penny and the dead guy
Yes, the gov't did fail him. Mental health in our country is drastically underfunded, and I wish there was more done to take care of the mentally unwell. A guy having a mental break who didn't harm anyone doesn't deserve to be killed. The threat of action doesn't warrant capital punishment. We're going to just have to agree to disagree on this, because i'd rather stop having the conversation with you because I find your whole POV gross and I don't think you're a very decent human being.