media cut it off now!!!
The girl in MA that was just convicted of some crime for her bf offing himself and her sending texts to him telling him to get back in the truck. Is there any personal responsibility at all in this stupid country. I agree the chick is a bitch and not a great human but we can now prosecute and jail people for speech...really?
So if your kid gets mean with anyone on a text or social media the parents will now go after them for jail time if their poor kid cannot handle life and offs himself.... we better build alot more jails
Or the moron parents out there can tell their fragile kids that life is not fair, sometimes it sucks and get the hell over it. The only person responsible if somebody cannot handle life and offs themselves is the dead person.
if ya got kids and they have access to texting or social
Forum rules
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
-
- Posts: 13399
- Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm
- awesome guy
- Posts: 54187
- Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
- Party: After 10
- Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified
Re: if ya got kids and they have access to texting or social
the sphere of responsibly has moved from the individual and onto everyone else unfortunately.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
- ip_law-hokie
- Posts: 19133
- Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:20 pm
- Alma Mater: Manchester
- Location: New York, NY
Re: if ya got kids and they have access to texting or social
Haven't been keeping up. Has she extinguished all appeals?
I think she gets off, but am surprised to see her serve any time in the meantime.
It's a bad ruling.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think she gets off, but am surprised to see her serve any time in the meantime.
It's a bad ruling.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
With their Cap’n and Chief Intelligence Officer having deserted them, River, Ham and Joe valiantly continue their whataboutismistic last stand of the DJT apology tour.
Re: if ya got kids and they have access to texting or social
Why is it a bad ruling?ip_law-hokie wrote:Haven't been keeping up. Has she extinguished all appeals?
I think she gets off, but am surprised to see her serve any time in the meantime.
It's a bad ruling.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Under Brandenburg v Ohio, incitement to commit an imminent lawless action is not protected speech. Suicide is lawless action.
Posted from my Commodore 64 using Tapatalk
- ip_law-hokie
- Posts: 19133
- Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:20 pm
- Alma Mater: Manchester
- Location: New York, NY
Re: if ya got kids and they have access to texting or social
Im not familiar with the case, but would think that it's distinguishable. I would like to know what overt acts the defendant took in Brandenburg in connection with the incitement.BigDave wrote:Why is it a bad ruling?ip_law-hokie wrote:Haven't been keeping up. Has she extinguished all appeals?
I think she gets off, but am surprised to see her serve any time in the meantime.
It's a bad ruling.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Under Brandenburg v Ohio, incitement to commit an imminent lawless action is not protected speech. Suicide is lawless action.
I think it's a bad ruling because it violates the principle that it is actions, not thoughts, that are subject to criminal prosecution. The girl simply shared her opinion on the thoughts of a crazy person in response to a request from that crazy person for her opinion.
You do have a point - I did not consider suicide to be a criminal act. You are correct that it is. Fundamentally, I have a problem with that concept as well.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
With their Cap’n and Chief Intelligence Officer having deserted them, River, Ham and Joe valiantly continue their whataboutismistic last stand of the DJT apology tour.
-
- Posts: 13399
- Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm
Re: if ya got kids and they have access to texting or social
Why is it a bad ruling?BigDave wrote:ip_law-hokie wrote:Haven't been keeping up. Has she extinguished all appeals?
I think she gets off, but am surprised to see her serve any time in the meantime.
It's a bad ruling.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Under Brandenburg v Ohio, incitement to commit an imminent lawless action is not protected speech. Suicide is lawless action.[/quo
Exactly what IP said, suicide should not be illegal, if you want to off yourself who is going to be charged, the dead guy. Assisted suicide is different as the living person has to do something to make the other person dead. But a straight suicide is the person offing himself.
My point was this girl was in a text argument with her bf and she did not do anything beside get in an argument with him, if that is a crime that the person goes and kills himself then she is not responsible for that, the person that CHOSE to off themselves is responsible.