Read the article twice, once as yourself and once as a devils advocate.
You know, sometimes people that cry rape are lying. Also, when I say "I want to kill my dog!" or "Will someone please beat the shit out of such-and-such politician!". I don't actually mean it. The only way to get proof he intended to have her killed would be the "assassin" sting the police tried to trap him with, but he didnt show up. I would not be opposed to using his quote as evidence that he is not remorseful and used to adjust the punishment accordingly. However, I am not fully convinced he raped anyone.
The problem with that in the United States at least, is there would be a whole subset of women that would use it for vengeance or so they can sue a man rather than anti-rape. Would you be opposed to spiked wiener armor? It would prevent unsolicited gropings. How about butt-traps for prison inmates?
So if I say "I want to kill my dog!" when he is barking, and then he keeps it up and I say "Shit, I really want to kill my dog now!" does that mean I should be charged with animal cruelty? This kid never hired a hitman, he just said shit in anger. The police set up a sting to get him to meet a "would be assassin" and try to get him to actually agree to a hit. He never showed up. Granted it was stupid to say, but the police and prosecution are just trying to get a bust so they can pat themselves on the back, not for justice. If it were justice, you would hear his side of the story and the prosecutor would totally drop the "solicitation of murder" charges all together. Maybe the girl had drunk sex with him, lied about how much she drank so she would get in trouble for driving drunk, and then she said he raped her because she didn't really remember what happened or maybe felt bad afterward and to cope with it she blamed him for it. That would piss me off if it happened to me, especially when being labeled a rapist is actually a worse thing to be labeled than as a murderer in this society.
It sounds to me like the timeline is OK up to the last part. There is no other-side explanation to this. It sounds to me like this kid is an idiot and completely failed to handle himself appropriately, however that doesn't mean he should be forced into a corner with a plea bargain that will waste 11 years of his life. For all we know, the girl had consensual drunk sex with him. People get promiscuous when they get drunk. She may have completely lied about how many drinks she had, after all, why admit to driving drunk? It sounds to me like this may be a case of the police trying to get one more bust for the sake of patting themselves on the back and justifying their jobs to the public. Its possible this kid over-reacted and/or was saying it in anger and never intended to actually hire a hitman at all. After all, he never met with a "would be assassin" that the police tried to set up as a sting. Read the article twice, once as yourself and once as a devils advocate.
Come on though, the police are intimidating to a 19 year old kid. A lot of kids would just admit anything because they are scared and bad liars. Police are fucking jerks sometimes, yet they are awarded higher authority than you or I. They should be just as accountable to underhanded tactics they use for busting people (for the sake of busting them, not for justice) as this kid is being held accountable for the "trying to hire a hitman".
Totally agreed. I started paying for ALL of my video games when Steam came out. I used to have to wait for a week or more for new video games, and many times they would sell out. This being the case, IRC came into play. It was easier to wait overnight to download a game. Convenience is key, and the MPAA/RIAA try to stick to CD / Movie outlet business models. It goes to show you what kind of asshole idiots run those organizations. They could just come out with a Steam-like service that gives you instant access to media, and every once in awhile does huge sales (like Steam). They could restrict the media through an online account and tie it to ROKU or other Netflix-like appliance, except you download the media to the devices. Even Steam controls the games so they can't be shared easily, however you have them downloaded on your computer and can have them on any other computer you own.
I suspect he will probably play the "it was a bad joke" defense. Its reasonable enough since a negotiation never took place, and money didn't actually exchange hands. That being the case, I am unaware of the law in that state, but it seems to me the police are making a bigger deal than necessary out of some dumb and douchey kid who obviously deserves time in prison for the rape if he is found not to be innocent. If anything this evidence should only be used as an indication he is not remorseful and the punishment can be adjusted accordingly (once again, if he is found not-innocent).
They are losing the nerd factor. Its mainly because we have an influx of non-nerds. Just the other day I was harassed by crazy a Right-winger who tried to say that Left-leaning leaders are all like Hilter and Stalin. I suppose when anything gets popular word-of-mouth inevitably shows it to the loonies.
As far as the RIAA/MPAA employee doing it, I doubt its at the behest of the organization. However, they are both doing everything else you just said. Corruption doesn't necessarily have anything to do with conspiracy. Its just assholes taking advantage of a new situation in an under-handed fashion.
You can have integrity and still do things other people think are unethical. Maybe an anarcho-communist pirates things because he thinks everything should be free. He is upholding his beliefs.
That is probably why college students are mostly pirates. That is another reason the whole "war against piracy" is doomed to fail, at least from a cost / benefit perspective. They are targeting an audience that probably can't afford to pay for the media let alone the court costs anyway. They will ruin a lot of lives along the way. I pay for pretty much everything these days myself with the exception of borrowing a movie from a friend, but in college.... I plead the 5th.
Get off your sycophantic soap box. I said nothing hateful nor prejudiced. Prejudice has five meanings.
1. Any adverse judgment or opinion made before facts are known.
I have witnessed countless times where a Republican was either a Neo-con, Tea-partier, or Religious nut (nut is a subjective concept, much like who you think is prejudiced, so it doesn't matter who you categorize as "nuts").Therefore, I constructed no opinion before the facts were laid out to me. Sure, there are probably reasonable Republicans, but it doesnt matter.
2. Any preconceived opinion or feeling, whether good or bad.
Once again, my feeling is not preconceived, as I have witnessed what I said myself.
3. An irrational hostile attitude, fear or hatred of a group of people.
I do not hate Republicans, I certainly don't fear them, and I was not hostile. I made an observation based on my experience which you spun into some kind of attack. That says more about you than me.
4. The damage caused by hatred or fear.
I caused no damage, because nobody cares what I think and if they do then they are an idiot and should glue their eyes shut so I never offend their irrational sensitivities again.
5. Knowledge formed in advance.
This is knowledge Ive formed thus far in my life, and I come from a very Republican area so I probably have a better idea than some person living in San Francisco.
I made an observation that should have had the words "Many Republicans" rather than the implied "All Republicans", which by the way was not used as a quantifier either so in absence of such you should at least interpret what I said as ambiguous as far as to how many Republicans it applies to. Furthermore, you make the flawed assumption that I am Left-leaning and seem to have failed to even bother reading the rest of my post. In closing, there is documented evidence that the smarter you are the more left you lean (and by smart I mean Doctors of Philosophy), and I was ACTUALLY arguing that what is now considered left-leaning is actually centrist.
Haha. Yes. Ever since I wrote that post Im getting bombarded by Right people thinking I am some sort of Ultra-liberal when really I just wasn't attacking the Left and trying to say that "Centrists are the smartest ones".
I could also point out that our government has a record deficit and debt due to the spend happy nature of Bush Jr. deciding to fight two wars and funnel money to his rich friends (Haliburton). Furthermore, FDR causing the depression is just Right propaganda. There have been studies that show he did so, then another study with a dissenting opinion. Fact is you can thank him for the superior infrastructure our nation had up until Reagan, who you can thank for lowering taxes on the wealthy thus making it harder to afford to maintain our roads. Republicans are responsible for the internet bubble, as there tends to be a higher percentage of traders who are also Republican. That was a failure of the investor being an idiot and thinking technology without actual physical product is a good idea, not a President. We are probably on the verge of another bubble as hinted by Goldman Sachs selling worthless Facebook stock overseas.
The problem comes from me being slightly vague and also the word "and" between honest / intelligent. I suppose I should have used "and/or". There are plenty of dishonest, but intelligent Republicans and Democrats that are out for themselves and say whatever they have to to get what they want. There are also plenty of not intelligent but honest in both parties (such as my Grandmother who insists Fox News is fair and unbiased). My argument (if it can be called that without evidence) was that now-a-days there is a right-shift in politics that makes centrists look like they are left-leaning. Centrists are the intelligent and honest ones is what I was saying. There are documented correlations between being "intelligent" (and by that I mean people with PhD's, and I don't care to argue other forms of intelligence) and having a more Left bias. I was arguing that Centrists are really the "intelligent" ones.
Since no-one can re-do the depression through their time machine I find that article very suspect. I am not a FDR worshiper, but I am just giving two examples that counter the other argument. You can't stuff despots and dictatorships on the Left side and claim the Right side is full of saints since despots and dictators are not in the spirit of the "left". I can't find it right now, but there is a graph of relative economic strength based on when a President was in office. You are right in that you cannot judge the current president by the current economy, at least not until later in their term. For example, Bush strapped us and its well documented. However, on the graph after many Republicans there was a significant decline, and thats about equal with Democrats. You can thank FDR for our infrastructure, and you can thank the Presidents since Reagan for its decline. Lets see, Reagan, Bush Sr, Bush Jr x 2. Thats 4 / 6 Republican. I suppose that's a common occurrence with coin flips, which is what I am saying the success of one particular president really is. Its not related to political party.
Slashdot Mirror
Read the article twice, once as yourself and once as a devils advocate.
You know, sometimes people that cry rape are lying. Also, when I say "I want to kill my dog!" or "Will someone please beat the shit out of such-and-such politician!". I don't actually mean it. The only way to get proof he intended to have her killed would be the "assassin" sting the police tried to trap him with, but he didnt show up. I would not be opposed to using his quote as evidence that he is not remorseful and used to adjust the punishment accordingly. However, I am not fully convinced he raped anyone.
The problem with that in the United States at least, is there would be a whole subset of women that would use it for vengeance or so they can sue a man rather than anti-rape. Would you be opposed to spiked wiener armor? It would prevent unsolicited gropings. How about butt-traps for prison inmates?
Haha. I would mod this up but I posted already.
Sure thing, because the mystical adult-fairy comes along on your 18th birthday and grants you a mature, mostly clear thinking adult mind.
Yeah. Read that later. They backed him into a corner, but I sense they didn't do it for justice.
would not get in trouble for driving drunk
So if I say "I want to kill my dog!" when he is barking, and then he keeps it up and I say "Shit, I really want to kill my dog now!" does that mean I should be charged with animal cruelty? This kid never hired a hitman, he just said shit in anger. The police set up a sting to get him to meet a "would be assassin" and try to get him to actually agree to a hit. He never showed up. Granted it was stupid to say, but the police and prosecution are just trying to get a bust so they can pat themselves on the back, not for justice. If it were justice, you would hear his side of the story and the prosecutor would totally drop the "solicitation of murder" charges all together. Maybe the girl had drunk sex with him, lied about how much she drank so she would get in trouble for driving drunk, and then she said he raped her because she didn't really remember what happened or maybe felt bad afterward and to cope with it she blamed him for it. That would piss me off if it happened to me, especially when being labeled a rapist is actually a worse thing to be labeled than as a murderer in this society.
It sounds to me like the timeline is OK up to the last part. There is no other-side explanation to this. It sounds to me like this kid is an idiot and completely failed to handle himself appropriately, however that doesn't mean he should be forced into a corner with a plea bargain that will waste 11 years of his life. For all we know, the girl had consensual drunk sex with him. People get promiscuous when they get drunk. She may have completely lied about how many drinks she had, after all, why admit to driving drunk? It sounds to me like this may be a case of the police trying to get one more bust for the sake of patting themselves on the back and justifying their jobs to the public. Its possible this kid over-reacted and/or was saying it in anger and never intended to actually hire a hitman at all. After all, he never met with a "would be assassin" that the police tried to set up as a sting. Read the article twice, once as yourself and once as a devils advocate.
One more reason prostitution should be legal everywhere.
Then so does about 80 percent of the world.
Come on though, the police are intimidating to a 19 year old kid. A lot of kids would just admit anything because they are scared and bad liars. Police are fucking jerks sometimes, yet they are awarded higher authority than you or I. They should be just as accountable to underhanded tactics they use for busting people (for the sake of busting them, not for justice) as this kid is being held accountable for the "trying to hire a hitman".
Yeah. I should have included high school students. I did the same thing.
Totally agreed. I started paying for ALL of my video games when Steam came out. I used to have to wait for a week or more for new video games, and many times they would sell out. This being the case, IRC came into play. It was easier to wait overnight to download a game. Convenience is key, and the MPAA/RIAA try to stick to CD / Movie outlet business models. It goes to show you what kind of asshole idiots run those organizations. They could just come out with a Steam-like service that gives you instant access to media, and every once in awhile does huge sales (like Steam). They could restrict the media through an online account and tie it to ROKU or other Netflix-like appliance, except you download the media to the devices. Even Steam controls the games so they can't be shared easily, however you have them downloaded on your computer and can have them on any other computer you own.
I suspect he will probably play the "it was a bad joke" defense. Its reasonable enough since a negotiation never took place, and money didn't actually exchange hands. That being the case, I am unaware of the law in that state, but it seems to me the police are making a bigger deal than necessary out of some dumb and douchey kid who obviously deserves time in prison for the rape if he is found not to be innocent. If anything this evidence should only be used as an indication he is not remorseful and the punishment can be adjusted accordingly (once again, if he is found not-innocent).
They are losing the nerd factor. Its mainly because we have an influx of non-nerds. Just the other day I was harassed by crazy a Right-winger who tried to say that Left-leaning leaders are all like Hilter and Stalin. I suppose when anything gets popular word-of-mouth inevitably shows it to the loonies.
I must be at the bottom of the barrel because I never used either. Just packetnews and a little script to query the bot if its queue was full.
As far as the RIAA/MPAA employee doing it, I doubt its at the behest of the organization. However, they are both doing everything else you just said. Corruption doesn't necessarily have anything to do with conspiracy. Its just assholes taking advantage of a new situation in an under-handed fashion.
You can have integrity and still do things other people think are unethical. Maybe an anarcho-communist pirates things because he thinks everything should be free. He is upholding his beliefs.
That is probably why college students are mostly pirates. That is another reason the whole "war against piracy" is doomed to fail, at least from a cost / benefit perspective. They are targeting an audience that probably can't afford to pay for the media let alone the court costs anyway. They will ruin a lot of lives along the way. I pay for pretty much everything these days myself with the exception of borrowing a movie from a friend, but in college.... I plead the 5th.
Get off your sycophantic soap box. I said nothing hateful nor prejudiced. Prejudice has five meanings.
1. Any adverse judgment or opinion made before facts are known.
I have witnessed countless times where a Republican was either a Neo-con, Tea-partier, or Religious nut (nut is a subjective concept, much like who you think is prejudiced, so it doesn't matter who you categorize as "nuts").Therefore, I constructed no opinion before the facts were laid out to me. Sure, there are probably reasonable Republicans, but it doesnt matter.
2. Any preconceived opinion or feeling, whether good or bad.
Once again, my feeling is not preconceived, as I have witnessed what I said myself.
3. An irrational hostile attitude, fear or hatred of a group of people.
I do not hate Republicans, I certainly don't fear them, and I was not hostile. I made an observation based on my experience which you spun into some kind of attack. That says more about you than me.
4. The damage caused by hatred or fear.
I caused no damage, because nobody cares what I think and if they do then they are an idiot and should glue their eyes shut so I never offend their irrational sensitivities again.
5. Knowledge formed in advance.
This is knowledge Ive formed thus far in my life, and I come from a very Republican area so I probably have a better idea than some person living in San Francisco.
I made an observation that should have had the words "Many Republicans" rather than the implied "All Republicans", which by the way was not used as a quantifier either so in absence of such you should at least interpret what I said as ambiguous as far as to how many Republicans it applies to. Furthermore, you make the flawed assumption that I am Left-leaning and seem to have failed to even bother reading the rest of my post. In closing, there is documented evidence that the smarter you are the more left you lean (and by smart I mean Doctors of Philosophy), and I was ACTUALLY arguing that what is now considered left-leaning is actually centrist.
Haha. Yes. Ever since I wrote that post Im getting bombarded by Right people thinking I am some sort of Ultra-liberal when really I just wasn't attacking the Left and trying to say that "Centrists are the smartest ones".
I could also point out that our government has a record deficit and debt due to the spend happy nature of Bush Jr. deciding to fight two wars and funnel money to his rich friends (Haliburton). Furthermore, FDR causing the depression is just Right propaganda. There have been studies that show he did so, then another study with a dissenting opinion. Fact is you can thank him for the superior infrastructure our nation had up until Reagan, who you can thank for lowering taxes on the wealthy thus making it harder to afford to maintain our roads. Republicans are responsible for the internet bubble, as there tends to be a higher percentage of traders who are also Republican. That was a failure of the investor being an idiot and thinking technology without actual physical product is a good idea, not a President. We are probably on the verge of another bubble as hinted by Goldman Sachs selling worthless Facebook stock overseas.
The problem comes from me being slightly vague and also the word "and" between honest / intelligent. I suppose I should have used "and/or". There are plenty of dishonest, but intelligent Republicans and Democrats that are out for themselves and say whatever they have to to get what they want. There are also plenty of not intelligent but honest in both parties (such as my Grandmother who insists Fox News is fair and unbiased). My argument (if it can be called that without evidence) was that now-a-days there is a right-shift in politics that makes centrists look like they are left-leaning. Centrists are the intelligent and honest ones is what I was saying. There are documented correlations between being "intelligent" (and by that I mean people with PhD's, and I don't care to argue other forms of intelligence) and having a more Left bias. I was arguing that Centrists are really the "intelligent" ones.
Since no-one can re-do the depression through their time machine I find that article very suspect. I am not a FDR worshiper, but I am just giving two examples that counter the other argument. You can't stuff despots and dictatorships on the Left side and claim the Right side is full of saints since despots and dictators are not in the spirit of the "left". I can't find it right now, but there is a graph of relative economic strength based on when a President was in office. You are right in that you cannot judge the current president by the current economy, at least not until later in their term. For example, Bush strapped us and its well documented. However, on the graph after many Republicans there was a significant decline, and thats about equal with Democrats. You can thank FDR for our infrastructure, and you can thank the Presidents since Reagan for its decline. Lets see, Reagan, Bush Sr, Bush Jr x 2. Thats 4 / 6 Republican. I suppose that's a common occurrence with coin flips, which is what I am saying the success of one particular president really is. Its not related to political party.
Ahh. I see. Neo-con is sufficiently broad enough to include all the other cases of Republican. However, now that is a different fallacy isnt it.