If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   Burning a gay teen to death gets "prankster" three and a half years in jail. Stay classy England   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 257
    More: Sick, Tyler Clementi, Yorkshire Post, Don Lemon, batty boys, Asperger syndrome, Trevor Project, Ottawa, Canada, Jim Swilley  
•       •       •

14354 clicks; posted to Main » on 24 Mar 2013 at 12:23 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



257 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-24 12:50:37 AM

dave2198: That has to be the stupidest thing I have ever read in my life. Congrats?


What?  You don't proof read?
 
2013-03-24 12:50:42 AM
Light him on fire.

/100%
 
2013-03-24 12:51:13 AM
How long, exactly, would the appropriate sentence be?

And what is accomplished by that theoretical ideal that isn't in three and a half years? (other than satiating revenge and sticking the murdered somewhere you never have to think about him again.)

Long prison sentences serve no one well as we either:
-pay for them to sit around and die of old age
-place them somewhere they learn to be a real criminal (because once your in, you'll never get a legit job again. The money associated with crime starts looking appealing even to the most rehabilitated cons) which is followed by...
-let them out into society after spending 10,20,30,40 years detached from it. The only thing they know is a violence-controlled world and whatever they learned from their fellow cons in those decades. Surrounded by naive, sexy, innocent normal citizens ready to be taken advantage of in all sorts of ways. Even if you are talking about the lucky few that try to rehabilitate, even many of those (and just about all the rest) are WORSE for society after you held them for decades and then released them.

No one likes crap like this but their prison sentences are much more reasonable than the land of the free with the highest % incarceration in the world. I've long said there is nothing that can be accomplished by 10 years in prison that can't be accomplished in 5.

And for anything longer than 10 the society should just man up and accept they are already taking a life and just execute the perp, instead of paying for them to sit in the "no one has to think about you now" box for a lifetime.

/And this is coming from a person opposed to capital punishment
 
2013-03-24 12:51:30 AM
I thought the Brits loved their queens...
 
2013-03-24 12:51:55 AM

Nina Haagen Dazs: doglover: Nina Haagen Dazs: What, no hate crime penalty enhancer England?

Because all crimes are hate crimes.

Also England is to law enforcement what Canada is to a tropical paradise.

It's the 3 1/2 years that I can't get over. It took that kid 1 day to die from his injuries. Even loaded up with morphine, he would have suffered horribly. For being gay.


Really???  Now I'm outraged!  I thought it was because he was autistic.
 
2013-03-24 12:53:10 AM

Bontesla: Why wouldn't we allow a murderer too enjoy a little bit of life?

/from what I read - the murderer didn't intend on killing the teen. He just thought dousing the naked boy with baby oil and setting him aflame would be hilarious.
//and that was factored in to why he was charged with the lesser crime.


Yeah, I'd feel bad about punishing the mentally deficient as well, but I doubt that was this particular bully's case...
 
2013-03-24 12:54:21 AM

doglover: Nina Haagen Dazs: doglover: Nina Haagen Dazs: What, no hate crime penalty enhancer England?

Because all crimes are hate crimes.

Also England is to law enforcement what Canada is to a tropical paradise.

It's the 3 1/2 years that I can't get over. It took that kid 1 day to die from his injuries. Even loaded up with morphine, he would have suffered horribly. For being gay.

What do you expect from a country that bans everything remotely dangerous, arrests people for inhuming home invaders, and doesn't let their police carry weapons? They don't even have a death penalty any more.


Well, that explains why they have to go easy on murderers.  Gotta control the population somehow.
 
2013-03-24 12:56:00 AM

GAT_00: If you want a treatise on crime theorem, look elsewhere. There's 20 different theorems, and since it's sociology, none of them acknowledge the other.


For those playing along at home, note the widespread availability of crime theorems, of which I am not aware.

One of the few testable versions has shown quite well that low socioeconomic status is a strong predictor. Basically, you leave people with no job and no hope of a future because your holy job creators left, people tend to choose to get what they can.

That's an interpretation imposed on the data, and mostly likely false causation.  Increasing research shows that low time preference (i.e., unwillingness to wait for a payoff) correlates very strongly with crime, especially violent crime, and with low SES.  Frustratingly, time preference seems to be a characteristic highly resistant to change.

And since you've been gradually taking away government assistance too, they're even more desperate. And once they get out, they have no hope of anything. So they commit more crimes.

Long story made short: conservative economic and government philosophies have left blighted areas with no jobs, no income, no education, and no hope.

Why wouldn't you steal?


Further and further down the garden path.  The "war on drugs" aside--which is stupidly supported by both conservatives and liberals--please discuss the specific conservative policies that have led to these outcomes.  In particular, how have they brought about the outcomes--no cheating by pointing to disastrous but well-intentioned liberal policies and blaming their effects on the pragmatic but economically effective policies they replaced.
 
2013-03-24 12:56:38 AM

RatMaster999: I thought the Brits loved their queens...


200 degrees that's why they call him Mr Farenheit.
 
2013-03-24 12:56:51 AM
Were here! Were Queer! If you kill us youll get three years!
 
2013-03-24 12:57:14 AM

MurphyMurphy: No one likes crap like this but their prison sentences are much more reasonable than the land of the free with the highest % incarceration in the world. I've long said there is nothing that can be accomplished by 10 years in prison that can't be accomplished in 5.


Ummm.......Bullshiat.  Society gets 5 more years of segregation and safety from the dangerous asshole you want to set free.
 
2013-03-24 12:58:05 AM
As the parent of a 21 year old, I can't imagine anything more horrible than my child being murdered and dying in a slow painful way. It would be unbearable to contemplate. I can't wrap my brain around that obscenely lenient sentence.
 
2013-03-24 01:01:15 AM

doglover: Happy Hours: It's not quite the same as necklacing - I thought that involved a gasoline filled tire around the neck. Still, it's not much better.

Accelerant + full body coverage. Potato, potahto.

Three years seems light.


3 years does seem light, but the accelerant in this case probably wasn't intended to be used to burn him alive. He thought these guys were his friends. At some point, they must have been somewhat nice to him.

I'm just speculating here, but maybe he was enjoying the attention and didn't mind having "gay boy" written on his body. And then maybe some idiot thought throwing a match at him would be funny and wouldn't cause him any serious injuries let alone death.

I don't know. I wasn't at the party.It was at the very least an incredibly stupid thing to do, but I'm not sure this started out as a bunch of people looking for a homosexual to burn to death.
I didn't even realize tanning oil was that flammable.
 
2013-03-24 01:02:43 AM

cman: Honest question here. Not taking anyone's side. I am curious, is there some sort of crime rate report from the medieval ages? I have always wondered when we started writing this shiat down.


Here ya go: http://www.capitalpunishmentuk.org/  A fascinating website.
 
2013-03-24 01:04:34 AM
Ah yes, Huffington Post, very nice of them to add that the victim of a horrible accidental death was gay in order to imply a hate crime. That will get more clicks.
 
2013-03-24 01:06:02 AM

Happy Hours: doglover: Happy Hours: It's not quite the same as necklacing - I thought that involved a gasoline filled tire around the neck. Still, it's not much better.

Accelerant + full body coverage. Potato, potahto.

Three years seems light.

3 years does seem light, but the accelerant in this case probably wasn't intended to be used to burn him alive. He thought these guys were his friends. At some point, they must have been somewhat nice to him.

I'm just speculating here, but maybe he was enjoying the attention and didn't mind having "gay boy" written on his body. And then maybe some idiot thought throwing a match at him would be funny and wouldn't cause him any serious injuries let alone death.

I don't know. I wasn't at the party.It was at the very least an incredibly stupid thing to do, but I'm not sure this started out as a bunch of people looking for a homosexual to burn to death.
I didn't even realize tanning oil was that flammable.


Oh yeah. Tanning oil. Bet it was spray on.

I forgot about the recall where they were saying don't use spray on suntan and then have a beach BBQ or a smoke until you've at least dried 20 minutes because something like this would happen. Aresolization is like a skeleton key that unlocks any substance's most flammable state.
 
2013-03-24 01:08:00 AM

unamused: MurphyMurphy: No one likes crap like this but their prison sentences are much more reasonable than the land of the free with the highest % incarceration in the world. I've long said there is nothing that can be accomplished by 10 years in prison that can't be accomplished in 5.

Ummm.......Bullshiat.  Society gets 5 more years of segregation and safety from the dangerous asshole you want to set free.


So you're delaying the inevitable. Or worse, turning a grade D criminal should you release him today into a grade A criminal by release.

Not that I'd expect someone that equivocates what I typed into me wanting to release dangerous assholes onto the streets to understand that, but that's really your problem.

If someone is able to be 'corrected' or rehabilitated it's going to happen inside of a decade. (It's going to happen inside of 3 years).... telling me that the purpose of the system is not to deal with criminals but to buy society a reprieve from them for X amount of time (at which point they are released into society, let's not forget that part).

It's not an easy problem to solve for: What do you do with the ones too bad to correct, but not bad enough to warrant capital punishment?

If you know anything about the topic you'll know that our current solution isn't working, at all.

We need to start looking at these issue with intelligence instead of 'tough on crime' bullshiat platitudes the people invested in the prison industry are always shoving down our throats.
 
2013-03-24 01:08:08 AM

duenor: something is missing here.
it's the gay kid's own birthday party. if this guy hated him so much, why was he invited?

this is what it sounds like to me:

1. gay kid throws party, invites a bunch of stupid friends
2. gay kid strips, lets his friends write all sorts of dumb stuff on him, enjoys the attention he's getting.
3. stupid friend decides it would be funny to see him try to put out the burning oil, figures it would just last a few seconds like he's seen on youtube
4. gay kid starts burning and can't stop it because the oil is all over and soaked into his skin, dies from massive loss of skin

It sounds like they are casting this as "bully writes anti gay stuff on poor helpless gay kid and then sets him on fire", but it just doesn't add up with the situation. for that to happen the "yob" would have to push his way into the kid's party, write all the stuff on him and set him on fire right in front of all his presumably friendly friends and family (it was at his home), without anyone trying to stop him.


WHERE WERE THE PARENTS???

It's almost as if the UK media focuses on the criminal instead of seeking someone else to blame.
 
2013-03-24 01:10:29 AM

Bontesla: Why wouldn't we allow a murderer too enjoy a little bit of life?

/from what I read - the murderer didn't intend on killing the teen. He just thought dousing the naked boy with baby oil and setting him aflame would be hilarious.
//and that was factored in to why he was charged with the lesser crime.


Can't we just chalk it up to "too stupid to live" and drop him into the nearest furnace?  Or make him Prime Minister, since he's proven himself to be politician-grade stupid.
 
2013-03-24 01:11:14 AM

Happy Hours: I didn't even realize tanning oil was that flammable.


Pubic hair serves as a wick, in a pinch.  Remember that when the power fails.
 
2013-03-24 01:16:36 AM
chrylis: ... please discuss the specific conservative policies that have led to these outcomes. In particular, how have they brought about the outcomes--no cheating by pointing to disastrous but well-intentioned liberal policies and blaming their effects on the pragmatic but economically effective policies they replaced.

Trickle-down economics, anti-tax zealotry and Randian objectivism as a whole. Unless you're one of those farkwits who are so far to the right they think Reagan was a liberal; of course, anybody who refers to general liberal policies as "Disastrous" and general Republican policies as "Pragmatic" or "Economically effective" is pretty much guaranteed to be a farkwit.

Not that this has anything to do with the topic at hand. Back on topic: What the fark is wrong with people.
 
2013-03-24 01:18:14 AM

doglover: Happy Hours: doglover: Happy Hours: It's not quite the same as necklacing - I thought that involved a gasoline filled tire around the neck. Still, it's not much better.

Accelerant + full body coverage. Potato, potahto.

Three years seems light.

3 years does seem light, but the accelerant in this case probably wasn't intended to be used to burn him alive. He thought these guys were his friends. At some point, they must have been somewhat nice to him.

I'm just speculating here, but maybe he was enjoying the attention and didn't mind having "gay boy" written on his body. And then maybe some idiot thought throwing a match at him would be funny and wouldn't cause him any serious injuries let alone death.

I don't know. I wasn't at the party.It was at the very least an incredibly stupid thing to do, but I'm not sure this started out as a bunch of people looking for a homosexual to burn to death.
I didn't even realize tanning oil was that flammable.

Oh yeah. Tanning oil. Bet it was spray on.

I forgot about the recall where they were saying don't use spray on suntan and then have a beach BBQ or a smoke until you've at least dried 20 minutes because something like this would happen. Aresolization is like a skeleton key that unlocks any substance's most flammable state.


Seriously - http://youtu.be/mc8KLKCPIlk
 
2013-03-24 01:18:24 AM

BarkingUnicorn: Happy Hours: I didn't even realize tanning oil was that flammable.

Pubic hair serves as a wick, in a pinch.  Remember that when the power fails.


Fritos (90% corn oil) will also burn nicely. Put a handful in a glass jar and you've got a makeshift candle.

Remember that when the power fails.
 
2013-03-24 01:22:13 AM
3.5 years for murder?  Holy crap that is one seriously farked up country.  Think about it, some guy got three months in jail for some "hate speech" on his Facebook page, yet murder only gets you 3.5 years.  Well, on the plus side we now know that murder is 14 times more serious than hate speech.  That has to be worth something, right?
 
2013-03-24 01:25:06 AM
FTA: The teen had reportedly been dared to strip down to his underpants before being doused in tanning oil, after which Sheard set him aflame at the party. ... Sheard's attorney said his client had been "deeply and significantly affected by what he has done and the tragic consequences that ensued," which describing Simpson's death as a "stupid prank that went wrong in a bad way,"

WTF did you expect to happen when you doused a person in oil and set them on fire? Are you so farking stupid that you didn't know that oil is flammable? That's no farking prank; that's torture. Seriously, this guy needs to get hurt in the worst possible way.
 
2013-03-24 01:32:37 AM

Ukab the Great: BarkingUnicorn: Happy Hours: I didn't even realize tanning oil was that flammable.

Pubic hair serves as a wick, in a pinch.  Remember that when the power fails.

Fritos (90% corn oil) will also burn nicely. Put a handful in a glass jar and you've got a makeshift candle.

Remember that when the power fails.


How is that going to run my laptop or TV or my refrigerator or A/C?

You don't really need lights most of the time - certainly not during the day unless you don't have windows.
 
2013-03-24 01:33:10 AM

doglover: Because all crimes are hate crimes.


So shoplifting is exhibiting hate for the object you're stealing?  The store employees that you ignore?
 
2013-03-24 01:34:54 AM

MurphyMurphy: unamused: MurphyMurphy: No one likes crap like this but their prison sentences are much more reasonable than the land of the free with the highest % incarceration in the world. I've long said there is nothing that can be accomplished by 10 years in prison that can't be accomplished in 5.

Ummm.......Bullshiat.  Society gets 5 more years of segregation and safety from the dangerous asshole you want to set free.

So you're delaying the inevitable. Or worse, turning a grade D criminal should you release him today into a grade A criminal by release.

Not that I'd expect someone that equivocates what I typed into me wanting to release dangerous assholes onto the streets to understand that, but that's really your problem.


False dichotomy is false dichotomy.

If someone is able to be 'corrected' or rehabilitated it's going to happen inside of a decade. (It's going to happen inside of 3 years).... telling me that the purpose of the system is not to deal with criminals but to buy society a reprieve from them for X amount of time (at which point they are released into society, let's not forget that part).

If it has not happened by the time they are 18, it is unlikely to happen.

It's not an easy problem to solve for: What do you do with the ones too bad to correct, but not bad enough to warrant capital punishment?

Put them down like a rabid dog you can't let out.

If you know anything about the topic you'll know that our current solution isn't working, at all.

Of course not.  We are filling our prisons full of non-dangerous folks like pot smokers and consensual fornicators.  Then the lefty government starts letting the assholes out because they "have no room" in order to get us to pay higher taxes.

We need to start looking at these issue with intelligence instead of 'tough on crime' bullshiat platitudes the people invested in the prison industry are always shoving down our throats.


Intelligence is not letting dogs out who have already bitten.  Even though it may be a microbe's fault.
 
2013-03-24 01:37:34 AM
What you Farkers haven't considered is this:

When Mr. Bloody-Farker-Murderer gets out of gaol (the demented British spelling), what's stopping the LGBT community in Britain from, say, torturing Mr. B-F-M for a few days and then setting *him* on fire?  Worst that can happen is that the LGBT members who got revenge will themselves get a slap on the wrist.

And that's the stupid thing about countries that have lenient laws:  if you resort to extra-judicial punishment (i.e. vigilantism) to punish evildoers, you'll just get a lenient punishment yourself.  When Anders Breivik gets out of his Norwegian prison after 3 years and a personal blowjob from the Prime Minister, what's stopping the parents of one of his victims from yanking Breivik off the street, disfiguring the hell out of him with boiling oil, and then dropping off Breivik in front of an emergency room to guarantee that Breivik spends the rest of his life screaming in agony?

I'm liberal in many ways, but I'm to the right of Jenghis Khan when it comes to violent crime.  What all the learned fools like William Kunstler and the British judiciary don't understand is that having the state mete out retribution for violent crime actually keeps violence down.  Before we had police systems, criminal acts were punished by personal vendettas which would often lead to never-ending feuds that made the Hatfield-McCoy dust-up look like child's play.  The whole eye-for-an-eye thing in the Bible was actually put in there to REDUCE revenge--usually, if somebody poked your eye out, you got even by poking both of his eyes out, burning his crops, raping his womenfolk, and utterly destroying his life.

I don't care much for the privatized prison industry because they're filling up prison with non-violent drug offenders.  However, I do like it that the laws are starting to get tough for violent crime.  I read a lot about crime, and one ridiculous thing I see over and over again is the serial killer who gets a slap on the wrist for his first murder, then goes on to kill a hell of a lot of people.  Or the drunk driver who kills a family, gets out of prison after a year, then goes on to kill more people.  I think a lot of our harsh laws are the direct result of shiatheads like William Kunstler and stupid parole boards who let serial killers loose...
 
2013-03-24 01:40:29 AM

Mock26: 3.5 years for murder?  Holy crap that is one seriously farked up country.  Think about it, some guy got three months in jail for some "hate speech" on his Facebook page, yet murder only gets you 3.5 years.  Well, on the plus side we now know that murder is 14 times more serious than hate speech.  That has to be worth something, right?


Maybe it's just not a big deal in England, like how killing your husband isnt a big deal here

Woman gets probation for murdering husband http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/local&id=8034887

Or of course theres the woman who got less than a year for killing her husband by shooting him in the back because he was too critical http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Winkler
 
2013-03-24 01:42:53 AM

you are a puppet: Maybe it's just not a big deal in England, like how killing your husband isnt a big deal here


... The Main tab really is just bigots of various stripes as far as the eye can see, isn't it?
 
2013-03-24 01:43:11 AM

unamused: If it has not happened by the time they are 18, it is unlikely to happen.


Yeah, I figured you were talking out your ass and knew nothing about the topic.

unamused: Intelligence is not letting dogs out who have already bitten. Even though it may be a microbe's fault.


9.999/10 you are letting them out anyways, a convenient point for you to completely skip over in with your less than witty one-liners.

You're way just makes sure that before release, they spend enough time in Gladiator College so they are well versed in the felonies they didn't know anything about.
 
2013-03-24 01:46:16 AM

germ78: FTA: The teen had reportedly been dared to strip down to his underpants before being doused in tanning oil, after which Sheard set him aflame at the party. ... Sheard's attorney said his client had been "deeply and significantly affected by what he has done and the tragic consequences that ensued," which describing Simpson's death as a "stupid prank that went wrong in a bad way,"

WTF did you expect to happen when you doused a person in oil and set them on fire? Are you so farking stupid that you didn't know that oil is flammable? That's no farking prank; that's torture. Seriously, this guy needs to get hurt in the worst possible way.


People are stupid. Also, the stuff isn't "tanning oil" on the label, it's "tanning spray" and I'll bet you dollars to donuts 80% of the public that uses that crap has never read the side of the can to notice the little warning that says it's flammable.

I don't doubt for a second that the intent here was to cause the victim some pain and make him look like a fool. But I also don't think that anyone there had any idea that tanning oil could burn someone so badly they would die from it, or that the intention was to kill him by doing it, or even to "torture" him as you say. And unfortunately--or fortunately--intent is a very necessary element of common-law crimes like murder. You just can't condemn someone for being thoughtless and stupid. Or even mean and hateful.

Now, if you can show that this idiot deliberately doused the victim with oil and set him on fire with the intent of killing him because he hated him for being gay; that there was premeditation involved in his choice of accelerant and the way he lured the victim in, then fine. But since they didn't and couldn't, you have to accept that it was nothing more than voluntary manslaughter. Sorry.
 
2013-03-24 01:49:39 AM

Happy Hours: Ukab the Great: BarkingUnicorn: Happy Hours: I didn't even realize tanning oil was that flammable.

Pubic hair serves as a wick, in a pinch.  Remember that when the power fails.

Fritos (90% corn oil) will also burn nicely. Put a handful in a glass jar and you've got a makeshift candle.

Remember that when the power fails.

How is that going to run my laptop or TV or my refrigerator or A/C?

You don't really need lights most of the time - certainly not during the day unless you don't have windows.


Burn enough of anything (Fritos, human flesh, etc)->boil water->steam turns turbine->voltage regulator->laptop, tv, etc.
 
2013-03-24 01:50:57 AM

The My Little Pony Killer: Bontesla: Why wouldn't we allow a murderer too enjoy a little bit of life?

/from what I read - the murderer didn't intend on killing the teen. He just thought dousing the naked boy with baby oil and setting him aflame would be hilarious.
//and that was factored in to why he was charged with the lesser crime.

Yeah, I'd feel bad about punishing the mentally deficient as well, but I doubt that was this particular bully's case...


How did they prove the guy that set him on fire was that dumb?  They present a diploma from an American public high school or something?
 
2013-03-24 01:54:25 AM
What really torques me about stuff like this is that there were two people in my community who got away with murder.

The first one was a drunk driver who killed a pedestrian, got a year in prison, then got out and--yes--killed another pedestrian.  Second time around, he also got a light sentence.  I consider drunk-driving fatalities to be murder--perhaps the driver didn't know what he was doing when he was drunk, but he did know what he was doing when he decided to drink in the first place.  And I'll bet that when he killed the first pedestrian that it wasn't his first time driving drunk--it was probably his 1,304th time, and he should have had some self-awareness that he could kill somebody.

The second one was mostly the result of a very stupid Minnesota law that makes it hard to convict somebody for murder without a body--basically, you could get away with murder for a long time in Minnesota if you were really good at disposing of bodies.  Basically, a guy I met once or twice--and was a stereotypical creep--was accused of kidnapping, raping, and murdering a little girl.  It came out in the trial that he was friends with the girl's parents and did drugs a lot with them (and I don't mean pot) and when he was too drunk or buzzed to go home, the parents would let him sleep in the girl's bed with her.  On top of that, they found the girl's bloody clothes in his storage locker and he supposedly bragged to his jailmates that the cops would never find the body.  And, yes, this satanic POS is still running free; I've heard a lot of people threaten to hurt him, but nobody actually did anything.  They could re-open the case without double jeopardy based on new DNA analysis, but the dumbshiat prosecutor is too busy busting pot smokers for his masters in Big Pharma to actually care about justice.

/Corrine, I hope you get justice some day
//Bobby, it's too bad I have a thriving art career, otherwise I'd fark you up so badly you'll wish you were murdered instead
///good to hear your POS brother got busted for kiddie porn and might actually go to prison someday
 
2013-03-24 01:57:51 AM

MurphyMurphy: unamused: If it has not happened by the time they are 18, it is unlikely to happen.

Yeah, I figured you were talking out your ass and knew nothing about the topic.

unamused: Intelligence is not letting dogs out who have already bitten. Even though it may be a microbe's fault.

9.999/10 you are letting them out anyways, a convenient point for you to completely skip over in with your less than witty one-liners.

You're way just makes sure that before release, they spend enough time in Gladiator College so they are well versed in the felonies they didn't know anything about.


I should have figured you couldn't catch on without pictures, but I'll give it one more try.

You are saying let them out in 5 years.  I am not saying let them out in ten.

Assholes like the one in this article should be put down like mad dogs.  We know it's not the dog's fault it got rabies, but we kill it just the same.  Under that condition I will guarantee you that the asshole in this story would ever become your "gladiator."
 
2013-03-24 02:00:04 AM

PC LOAD LETTER: doglover: They don't even have a death penalty any more. Which is odd because England practically invented the modern idea of the humane death penalty in their Imperial age. Before that it was more... creative.

And what did drawing and quartering do to the crime rate? Zippo. Nada. Zilch.


I heard it cut the crime rate in half.
 
2013-03-24 02:00:06 AM

Arumat: The My Little Pony Killer: Bontesla: Why wouldn't we allow a murderer too enjoy a little bit of life?

/from what I read - the murderer didn't intend on killing the teen. He just thought dousing the naked boy with baby oil and setting him aflame would be hilarious.
//and that was factored in to why he was charged with the lesser crime.

Yeah, I'd feel bad about punishing the mentally deficient as well, but I doubt that was this particular bully's case...

How did they prove the guy that set him on fire was that dumb?  They present a diploma from an American public high school or something?


Angry because most public schools in VA crank out illiterates, Bunky? Thank your parents for raising you there.
 
2013-03-24 02:00:12 AM

Gyrfalcon: germ78: FTA: The teen had reportedly been dared to strip down to his underpants before being doused in tanning oil, after which Sheard set him aflame at the party. ... Sheard's attorney said his client had been "deeply and significantly affected by what he has done and the tragic consequences that ensued," which describing Simpson's death as a "stupid prank that went wrong in a bad way,"

WTF did you expect to happen when you doused a person in oil and set them on fire? Are you so farking stupid that you didn't know that oil is flammable? That's no farking prank; that's torture. Seriously, this guy needs to get hurt in the worst possible way.

People are stupid. Also, the stuff isn't "tanning oil" on the label, it's "tanning spray" and I'll bet you dollars to donuts 80% of the public that uses that crap has never read the side of the can to notice the little warning that says it's flammable.

I don't doubt for a second that the intent here was to cause the victim some pain and make him look like a fool. But I also don't think that anyone there had any idea that tanning oil could burn someone so badly they would die from it, or that the intention was to kill him by doing it, or even to "torture" him as you say. And unfortunately--or fortunately--intent is a very necessary element of common-law crimes like murder. You just can't condemn someone for being thoughtless and stupid. Or even mean and hateful.

Now, if you can show that this idiot deliberately doused the victim with oil and set him on fire with the intent of killing him because he hated him for being gay; that there was premeditation involved in his choice of accelerant and the way he lured the victim in, then fine. But since they didn't and couldn't, you have to accept that it was nothing more than voluntary manslaughter. Sorry.



I worked in the local court system before becoming an artist, and my understanding is this:  at least in the US, if you accidentally kill somebody in the commission of another crime, you get charged with murder.  Setting somebody on fire is assault and battery; if he dies, you're guilty of murder even if you didn't try to kill them.  Same with pointing a gun in a random direction and firing; the unlawful discharge of a firearm is a crime and if you accidentally hit somebody with a bullet, you go to prison.  Being too stupid to understand the flammability of tanning oil doesn't exonerate a person for murder, at least in the US.  Even if this is knocked down to manslaughter from murder, 3-1/2 years is far too light for manslaughter, unless the British have gone totally balmy.
 
2013-03-24 02:01:20 AM

Fluorescent Testicle: you are a puppet: Maybe it's just not a big deal in England, like how killing your husband isnt a big deal here

... The Main tab really is just bigots of various stripes as far as the eye can see, isn't it?


If that's what you want it to be, sure
 
2013-03-24 02:06:06 AM
Yes, but drugging, raping, pissing on a girl, and dumping her naked when you're done with her will only get you 12 months, 6 with time off for good behavior.
 
2013-03-24 02:08:47 AM

Mock26: 3.5 years for murder?  Holy crap that is one seriously farked up country.  Think about it, some guy got three months in jail for some "hate speech" on his Facebook page, yet murder only gets you 3.5 years.  Well, on the plus side we now know that murder is 14 times more serious than hate speech.  That has to be worth something, right?


Our country isn't much better.  IIRC, some black guy in Texas once got 25 years in prison for possessing two, count 'em, two joints.  Then some other creep in Texas raped an 8 year old boy then, a week or two later, set the boy on fire with gasoline to keep him from testifying.  The boy suffered horribly for over a decade before dying of his burns.  And, yes, the same idiotic Texas judiciary that sentenced the black dude to 25 years in prison is about to release from prison on a technicality the same shiatbag who burned the little boy.

It's crap like this that's made me a fan of extra-judicial punishment.  Not lynching which often kills innocent people (e.g. Emmett Till), but deliberately punishing some bastard who knows how to prank the system or has a POS lawyer like William Kunstler.  Why do you think that Dexter is such a popular TV show?
 
2013-03-24 02:08:47 AM

Psycat: I worked in the local court system before becoming an artist, and my understanding is this:  at least in the US, if you accidentally kill somebody in the commission of another crime, you get charged with murder.  Setting somebody on fire is assault and battery; if he dies, you're guilty of murder even if you didn't try to kill them.  Same with pointing a gun in a random direction and firing; the unlawful discharge of a firearm is a crime and if you accidentally hit somebody with a bullet, you go to prison.  Being too stupid to understand the flammability of tanning oil doesn't exonerate a person for murder, at least in the US.  Even if this is knocked down to manslaughter from murder, 3-1/2 years is far too light for manslaughter, unless the British have gone totally balmy.


It depends on what the situation surrounding it was in the US. Homicide with malicious intent is murder, depending on if it's premeditated or not, or if the person committed any kind of special circumstances along with the act, like torture or rape, or the commission of a hijacking. Manslaughter applies if the state of mind or circumstances surrounding the incident mitigate premeditation or malicious intent. Involuntary Manslaughter or Negligent Homicide is what the guy accidentally discharging the gun into the wall and killing his neighbor might find himself charged with.
 
2013-03-24 02:08:54 AM

cman: PC LOAD LETTER: doglover: They don't even have a death penalty any more. Which is odd because England practically invented the modern idea of the humane death penalty in their Imperial age. Before that it was more... creative.

And what did drawing and quartering do to the crime rate? Zippo. Nada. Zilch.

Honest question here. Not taking anyone's side. I am curious, is there some sort of crime rate report from the medieval ages? I have always wondered when we started writing this shiat down.


The Holy Roman Empire was actually anal as fark about writing any official-type-shiat down, so i wouldn't be surprised if there were borough-by-borough, village-by-village judicial records, just like the crazy-detailed weather and harvest records their reeves left us (which have been used by climatologists and historians as a glimpse into the climate during the medieval era.
 
2013-03-24 02:09:17 AM
I'm not usually not one to encourage "Prison Justice". But in this case...
 
2013-03-24 02:10:53 AM

Psycat: The first one was a drunk driver who killed a pedestrian, got a year in prison, then got out and--yes--killed another pedestrian.  Second time around, he also got a light sentence.  I consider drunk-driving fatalities to be murder--perhaps the driver didn't know what he was doing when he was drunk, but he did know what he was doing when he decided to drink in the first place.  And I'll bet that when he killed the first pedestrian that it wasn't his first time driving drunk--it was probably his 1,304th time, and he should have had some self-awareness that he could kill somebody.


Need more details. I'd be willing to bet that it wasn't just being drunk that caused the accident. Was the driver speeding, running red lights, failing to control his vehicle, driving with no headlights?

Was the pedestrian being a farking moran?

Pedestrians belong on sidewalks or crosswalks, not in the middle of the road. If they enter a crosswalk against a light, cars are still required by law to yield for them, but it doesn't relieve the pedestrian of all responsibility if they get smashed by a car and it shouldn't surprise them either.

So fill us in on the rest of the details. Was the drunk driver running red lights or stop signs? Was the pedestrian also drunk and jaywalking?
 
2013-03-24 02:11:41 AM

hardinparamedic: Psycat: I worked in the local court system before becoming an artist, and my understanding is this:  at least in the US, if you accidentally kill somebody in the commission of another crime, you get charged with murder.  Setting somebody on fire is assault and battery; if he dies, you're guilty of murder even if you didn't try to kill them.  Same with pointing a gun in a random direction and firing; the unlawful discharge of a firearm is a crime and if you accidentally hit somebody with a bullet, you go to prison.  Being too stupid to understand the flammability of tanning oil doesn't exonerate a person for murder, at least in the US.  Even if this is knocked down to manslaughter from murder, 3-1/2 years is far too light for manslaughter, unless the British have gone totally balmy.

It depends on what the situation surrounding it was in the US. Homicide with malicious intent is murder, depending on if it's premeditated or not, or if the person committed any kind of special circumstances along with the act, like torture or rape, or the commission of a hijacking. Manslaughter applies if the state of mind or circumstances surrounding the incident mitigate premeditation or malicious intent. Involuntary Manslaughter or Negligent Homicide is what the guy accidentally discharging the gun into the wall and killing his neighbor might find himself charged with.


Thanks for clarifying that.  BTW, do you think that setting some guy on fire constitutes malicious intent if the firebug didn't understand how flammable tanning oil is?  I think it is, but if he's drunk or very stupid, it might count in his favor...
 
2013-03-24 02:17:43 AM

Happy Hours: Psycat: The first one was a drunk driver who killed a pedestrian, got a year in prison, then got out and--yes--killed another pedestrian.  Second time around, he also got a light sentence.  I consider drunk-driving fatalities to be murder--perhaps the driver didn't know what he was doing when he was drunk, but he did know what he was doing when he decided to drink in the first place.  And I'll bet that when he killed the first pedestrian that it wasn't his first time driving drunk--it was probably his 1,304th time, and he should have had some self-awareness that he could kill somebody.

Need more details. I'd be willing to bet that it wasn't just being drunk that caused the accident. Was the driver speeding, running red lights, failing to control his vehicle, driving with no headlights?

Was the pedestrian being a farking moran?

Pedestrians belong on sidewalks or crosswalks, not in the middle of the road. If they enter a crosswalk against a light, cars are still required by law to yield for them, but it doesn't relieve the pedestrian of all responsibility if they get smashed by a car and it shouldn't surprise them either.

So fill us in on the rest of the details. Was the drunk driver running red lights or stop signs? Was the pedestrian also drunk and jaywalking?



In the first case, the pedestrian was crossing at a crosswalk and the driver ran a red light.  Pretty cut 'n' dried.  In the second case, the pedestrian was walking on the shoulder of a road without sidewalks.  What gets me is that the driver didn't get his license permanently revoked after the first fatality.  I'm not 100% sure, but I think in Minnesota, it's always the driver's fault unless the pedestrian actually tries to get himself run over, and being a drunk driver in a fatal accident is usually an open 'n' shut case.
 
2013-03-24 02:21:33 AM

unamused: Assholes like the one in this article should be put down like mad dogs. We know it's not the dog's fault it got rabies, but we kill it just the same. Under that condition I will guarantee you that the asshole in this story would ever become your "gladiator."


They are humans, not dogs.

But thanks for spelling out your trolling so plainly.
 
Displayed 50 of 257 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report