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.

(Detroit Free Press)   "He was like chivalrous in an urban sort of way", say family of Detroit man who stuck his neck out to save complete strangers and was killed for doing so   (freep.com) divider line 91
    More: Sad, Detroit, Royal Oak, Detroit Receiving Hospital  
•       •       •

16420 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Mar 2013 at 12:10 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-25 01:48:40 AM  

halB: BarkingUnicorn: One of the things a defense lawyer cannot do is suborn perjury.  If a client says, "I did it, but I'm gonna testify that I didn't," the lawyer must either persuade the client not to testify or withdraw from the case.

Ya, that would be subsection (d), which I referenced.  It's also not a problem if the client is very carefully questioned about the details of the case.  It's cute that you're trying to play the "I know stuff about the law because I watch Law & Order."  Please continue to contribute in these amazing ways to these discussions.


California has the "narrative testimony" option, so that a defendant who is going to testify falsely but who simply must testify wants to tell his side, the attorney need not actually ask the question. He can just say "And then what happened?" and let the defendant continue. Most states don't allow that, I think (?) but some defendants are bound & determined to have their say and that puts the attorney in a tough spot.

As to the client who says "I did it but I'm going to testify I didn't," that's not really considered perjury, at least not in the same way. OF COURSE the defendant is claiming he didn't do it; otherwise, why are we even in court? And OF COURSE he's going to get on the stand (if the attorney lets him) and say he didn't do it, because what's he going to do, confess? It's technically perjury, but usually courts aren't going to hold that in the same light as if the defendant gets up and says "Not only did I not do it, but my brother did it, because he was cheating on his wife." There are usually better reasons not to put a defendant on the stand than that he's going to lie about committing a crime.
 
2013-03-25 01:58:00 AM  
When I read the part about how Anderson liked to read his poetry aloud on the bus, and some cheered and others were angry, I thought, "That is one interesting gadfly of a man. He sounded quite unconventional, and he probably would have made for one hell of a party guest."

Then I read about how he'd pay people to give up their bus seats for a lady. Sorry folks, I lost it right there.
 
2013-03-25 02:17:16 AM  
"Knight also wrote that he was praying for Anderson's family and had contemplated suicide. "

Quit contemplating and just do it already.
 
2013-03-25 02:19:31 AM  
Clearly, we need to ban heroes.
 
2013-03-25 02:21:45 AM  

Gyrfalcon: halB: BarkingUnicorn: One of the things a defense lawyer cannot do is suborn perjury.  If a client says, "I did it, but I'm gonna testify that I didn't," the lawyer must either persuade the client not to testify or withdraw from the case.

Ya, that would be subsection (d), which I referenced.  It's also not a problem if the client is very carefully questioned about the details of the case.  It's cute that you're trying to play the "I know stuff about the law because I watch Law & Order."  Please continue to contribute in these amazing ways to these discussions.

California has the "narrative testimony" option, so that a defendant who is going to testify falsely but who simply must testify wants to tell his side, the attorney need not actually ask the question. He can just say "And then what happened?" and let the defendant continue. Most states don't allow that, I think (?) but some defendants are bound & determined to have their say and that puts the attorney in a tough spot.

As to the client who says "I did it but I'm going to testify I didn't," that's not really considered perjury, at least not in the same way. OF COURSE the defendant is claiming he didn't do it; otherwise, why are we even in court? And OF COURSE he's going to get on the stand (if the attorney lets him) and say he didn't do it, because what's he going to do, confess? It's technically perjury, but usually courts aren't going to hold that in the same light as if the defendant gets up and says "Not only did I not do it, but my brother did it, because he was cheating on his wife." There are usually better reasons not to put a defendant on the stand than that he's going to lie about committing a crime.



You are correct that quite a few states don't allow narrative.  I can't say whether it is a majority or minority position.  However, I must state that narrative most likely doesn't allow the lawyer to even ask "and then what happened?"  Usually the lawyer moves to allow testimony in narrative, starts with "please tell the court what you would like to say," and sits down.  Any questions after that would be suborning perjury.

Further, a lawyer in just about every district cannot allow a client to testify to matters which the lawyer knows are false (outside of narrative where allowed).  Of course... it's kind of hard to prove that an attorney knew that the testimony would be false.  The client would have to tell someone that he told the lawyer, and if he was convicted his credibility would be shot.  I fear many lawyers allow their clients to perjure themselves, knowing the impossibility of proving the attorney knew.
 
2013-03-25 02:23:10 AM  

over_and_done: Gyrfalcon: And, as I said and will keep saying: That's not the lawyer's decision to make. Unless you're okay with people just being locked up in mental hospitals against their will without having any say in the matter. Are you? Because that's what you're demanding here. You're asking someone else to say this guy is too crazy to live, based on a three-paragraph news article, and if that's fine by you, then understand it's a short step till anyone can be found too crazy to live based on equally flimsy evidence.

No, I'm asking someone else to say this guy is too crazy to live, based on the fact that he killed someone in front of witnesses.

Yes, I know the lawyer isn't allowed to do that.  I'm merely saddened that a lawyer will defend someone he knows to be guilty rather than stepping down or asking for a mental evaluation.


....and what if he really was stabbed in the leg and was defending himself? Would you still want someone to say he was still to crazy to live then?
 
2013-03-25 02:23:55 AM  
Honest to god why do people live in these cities?

You can get a better apartment with better access to fresh food and better schools by moving to the middle of idaho.

But then I guess you would be more difficult to mobilize on election day. After all if democratic boosters with vans cannot pull up to the housing projects and urban churches and pack 20 votes in for a ride to the polls the entire machine might collapse.

So yeah you might have to stay in a shiatty urban core where your life is measured in the number of meters between you and the crazy homeless guy.
 
2013-03-25 02:26:44 AM  

halB: BarkingUnicorn: One of the things a defense lawyer cannot do is suborn perjury.  If a client says, "I did it, but I'm gonna testify that I didn't," the lawyer must either persuade the client not to testify or withdraw from the case.

Ya, that would be subsection (d), which I referenced.  It's also not a problem if the client is very carefully questioned about the details of the case.  It's cute that you're trying to play the "I know stuff about the law because I watch Law & Order."  Please continue to contribute in these amazing ways to these discussions.


Actually, I learned it from my defense attorney. :-)
 
2013-03-25 02:28:41 AM  

over_and_done: BarkingUnicorn: over_and_done: I'm not arguing "guilty," I'm arguing "crazy". Maybe that's not a distinction that we're allowed to make, I dunno. I think the lawyer could help this psycho fark more by getting him put away in the looney bin instead of arguing that he's normal.

You didn't read linked article, did you?  You still have no idea what a defense attorney''s job is. The defense attorney's job is to make the prosecution prove guilt beyond any doubt that a reasonable person would have.  It is his job to raise doubts... all of them, even the most obviously unreasonable ones.

Treatment can be ordered by the court, if he's found guilty.

I think we're talking past each other.  It's great that they're doing their job, but it's a job that shouldn't be required of them in the first place.  I'm too tired and angry to make my point coherent, so I'll stop trying.


That's the best idea you've had so far.  I can't believe you wrote this!
 
2013-03-25 02:31:47 AM  

DrZiffle: HotWingAgenda: Detroit man who stuck his neck out

Yeah, I could have told him how that would end.  That's like starting an obituary about a "flamboyant gay man from Harlan, Kentucky".

http://www.advocate.com/society/law/2013/01/15/vicco-ky-smallest-us- ci ty-lgbt-rights-law


Ky is for some reason no one here can figure out....including the lgbt community......becoming an lgbt community. Im an urban Libertarian-conservative survivalist kinda guy and roughly half the people I socialize with are either gay or strongly gay rights aware despite being libertarians and fiscal conservatives. We have social clubs of people who grow their own food downtown and get together on weekends to cook gourmet meals and drink wine. It would be accurate to call that a high lgbt quotient activity around here. I guess there are people who are PO'd about it, but im running into fewer of them anymore. Even my friends who are homeschooling baptists just kind of shake their heads in a rueful sort of way and quietly disapprove of all the gayness.

Its getting tough for the old time gay activists though, they get angry about something and proclaim their sexuality and no one cares. Its suddenly tacky to be to upset about it all. Its almost (drumroll) like spending time around different people means you are less sensitive to the differences (gasp)

Maybe its time for hollywood and big media to loosen up and let some conservatives and libertarians in eh?  Woah nelly......cant have that, you know how stupid and inbred conservatives are......

Prejudice....it aint just a white sheets thing anymore.
 
2013-03-25 02:38:47 AM  

Gyrfalcon: As to the client who says "I did it but I'm going to testify I didn't," that's not really considered perjury, at least not in the same way. OF COURSE the defendant is claiming he didn't do it; otherwise, why are we even in court? And OF COURSE he's going to get on the stand (if the attorney lets him) and say he didn't do it, because what's he going to do, confess? It's technically perjury, but usually courts aren't going to hold that in the same light as if the defendant gets up and says "Not only did I not do it, but my brother did it, because he was cheating on his wife." There are usually better reasons not to put a defendant on the stand than that he's going to lie about committing a crime.


It most certainly is perjury without any "technically" about it.  A lawyer cannot stop a lying client from testifying; all the lawyer can say is, "If you decide to testify, I will withdraw before you do" and then do it.  If he puts the client on stand and the client lies, the lawyer has suborned perjury and could be disbarred.

I think a defendant who's cross-examined can expect to hear, "Did you do it?"  If he did it, that's the best reason not to put him on the stand.
 
2013-03-25 02:42:05 AM  

skinink: Sad story all around. The guy defending the couple lost his life. The assailant is mentally ill and homeless and probably should never have been outside a mental institution. Even still, I hope he gets convicted and sentenced to life or pleads insanity and gets sent to treatment for the rest of his life.

And riding the bus where I live is bad enough. I wouldn't want to be riding any bus in Detroit.


This, so much This.
 
2013-03-25 02:42:37 AM  

halB: BarkingUnicorn: One of the things a defense lawyer cannot do is suborn perjury.  If a client says, "I did it, but I'm gonna testify that I didn't," the lawyer must either persuade the client not to testify or withdraw from the case.

Ya, that would be subsection (d), which I referenced.  It's also not a problem if the client is very carefully questioned about the details of the case.  It's cute that you're trying to play the "I know stuff about the law because I watch Law & Order."  Please continue to contribute in these amazing ways to these discussions.


Actually, I learned it from my defense attorney.
 
2013-03-25 03:16:44 AM  

BarkingUnicorn: halB: BarkingUnicorn: One of the things a defense lawyer cannot do is suborn perjury.  If a client says, "I did it, but I'm gonna testify that I didn't," the lawyer must either persuade the client not to testify or withdraw from the case.

Ya, that would be subsection (d), which I referenced.  It's also not a problem if the client is very carefully questioned about the details of the case.  It's cute that you're trying to play the "I know stuff about the law because I watch Law & Order."  Please continue to contribute in these amazing ways to these discussions.

Actually, I learned it from my defense attorney.


Your legal knowledge stems from the fact that your defense attorney had to withdraw from his representation because you were guilty and insisted on pleading not guilty?
 
2013-03-25 03:25:37 AM  

HotWingAgenda: BarkingUnicorn: halB: BarkingUnicorn: One of the things a defense lawyer cannot do is suborn perjury.  If a client says, "I did it, but I'm gonna testify that I didn't," the lawyer must either persuade the client not to testify or withdraw from the case.

Ya, that would be subsection (d), which I referenced.  It's also not a problem if the client is very carefully questioned about the details of the case.  It's cute that you're trying to play the "I know stuff about the law because I watch Law & Order."  Please continue to contribute in these amazing ways to these discussions.

Actually, I learned it from my defense attorney.

Your legal knowledge stems from the fact that your defense attorney had to withdraw from his representation because you were guilty and insisted on pleading not guilty?


Explains a lot really. The exact opposite of my defense attorney, who really didn't have much a job because the charges were false. There was no evidence of any wrongdoing and viola it all got expunged. I'm not even sure had to do more than show up to the courthouse and enter the motion to dismiss the case.
 
2013-03-25 03:27:06 AM  

HotWingAgenda: BarkingUnicorn: halB: BarkingUnicorn: One of the things a defense lawyer cannot do is suborn perjury.  If a client says, "I did it, but I'm gonna testify that I didn't," the lawyer must either persuade the client not to testify or withdraw from the case.

Ya, that would be subsection (d), which I referenced.  It's also not a problem if the client is very carefully questioned about the details of the case.  It's cute that you're trying to play the "I know stuff about the law because I watch Law & Order."  Please continue to contribute in these amazing ways to these discussions.

Actually, I learned it from my defense attorney.

Your legal knowledge stems from the fact that your defense attorney had to withdraw from his representation because you were guilty and insisted on pleading not guilty?


No, we just had a conversation about subornation of perjury. I think that's what halB meant by, "careful questioning of the client about the details of the case."

Case was dismissed.
 
2013-03-25 03:37:48 AM  

doglover: HotWingAgenda: BarkingUnicorn: halB: BarkingUnicorn: One of the things a defense lawyer cannot do is suborn perjury.  If a client says, "I did it, but I'm gonna testify that I didn't," the lawyer must either persuade the client not to testify or withdraw from the case.

Ya, that would be subsection (d), which I referenced.  It's also not a problem if the client is very carefully questioned about the details of the case.  It's cute that you're trying to play the "I know stuff about the law because I watch Law & Order."  Please continue to contribute in these amazing ways to these discussions.

Actually, I learned it from my defense attorney.

Your legal knowledge stems from the fact that your defense attorney had to withdraw from his representation because you were guilty and insisted on pleading not guilty?

Explains a lot really. The exact opposite of my defense attorney, who really didn't have much a job because the charges were false. There was no evidence of any wrongdoing and viola it all got expunged. I'm not even sure had to do more than show up to the courthouse and enter the motion to dismiss the case.


Same here... no evidence of any wrongdoing, case dismissed.
 
2013-03-25 03:42:17 AM  

BarkingUnicorn: doglover: HotWingAgenda: BarkingUnicorn: halB: BarkingUnicorn: One of the things a defense lawyer cannot do is suborn perjury.  If a client says, "I did it, but I'm gonna testify that I didn't," the lawyer must either persuade the client not to testify or withdraw from the case.

Ya, that would be subsection (d), which I referenced.  It's also not a problem if the client is very carefully questioned about the details of the case.  It's cute that you're trying to play the "I know stuff about the law because I watch Law & Order."  Please continue to contribute in these amazing ways to these discussions.

Actually, I learned it from my defense attorney.

Your legal knowledge stems from the fact that your defense attorney had to withdraw from his representation because you were guilty and insisted on pleading not guilty?

Explains a lot really. The exact opposite of my defense attorney, who really didn't have much a job because the charges were false. There was no evidence of any wrongdoing and viola it all got expunged. I'm not even sure had to do more than show up to the courthouse and enter the motion to dismiss the case.

Same here... no evidence of any wrongdoing, case dismissed.


I think the people who are anti-police the most are the ones who've been wrongfully accused. When you're caught and you've done something wrong, you usually cop to it. Either with a mea culpa or by saying it wasn't wrong.

In my case I did nothing and so the arrest was a surprise and the subsequent wait for a trial an ordeal. A trial I didn't get, by the way, so thankfully I still don't know what it's like to be before a judge in his or her official capacity but yeah I've spent 100 days on house arrest for the crime of being innocent and if you've ever wondered why I'm adamantly opposed to giving the courts more powers and infinitely fond of stripping the powers they do have from them, now you know.
 
2013-03-25 03:52:33 AM  
7th Son of a 7th Son : Who the fark names their kid "Karon" ?

Some family in Detroit who raise their kids to be stand up guys.
 
2013-03-25 04:15:25 AM  

doglover: I think the people who are anti-police the most are the ones who've been wrongfully accused. When you're caught and you've done something wrong, you usually cop to it. Either with a mea culpa or by saying it wasn't wrong.

In my case I did nothing and so the arrest was a surprise and the subsequent wait for a trial an ordeal. A trial I didn't get, by the way, so thankfully I still don't know what it's like to be before a judge in his or her official capacity but yeah I've spent 100 days on house arrest for the crime of being innocent and if you've ever wondered why I'm adamantly opposed to giving the courts more powers and infinitely fond of stripping the powers they do have from them, now you know.


Perfectly understandable.  I spent only 8 hours in jail, but the whole thing dragged out for almost exactly a year.  Very stressful. I was in a courtroom 6 times, only the last time with a lawyer.  The other five were spent arguing for a public defender.

Judge finally told me to hire an attorney or defend myself.  I told him I suffered from depression and couldn't think or argue effectively, so if I defended myself I'd  screw it up and a conviction would likely be overturned on appeal.  He found a slush fund from which to pay for my lawyer.

She and I prepared for trial, including that convo about subornation of perjury.  Right before trial, prosecutor had to admit that he could no longer contact the alleged victim and sole eyewitness.  Case dismissed.

I had to purchase a whole new outfit, from shoes to necktie, for that trial.  Straight from court, I took it all back to Walmart and told customer service I wanted a refund, even for the black socks.  Girl asked why I was returning it all and I replied,

"My girlfriend says this just isn't good enough for her sister's wedding."

No further questions; instant refund.

Took another year to re-grow my ponytail, dammit.  But that's another story.
 
2013-03-25 06:36:02 AM  
Can't believe no one has asked: WTF was a white hipster couple doing at night, riding the bus, in Detroit?

Oh, and urban suggestion: if you are not much of a fighter and some crazy dude elbows you in the throat for no reason at all, just let it go. Don't bother arguing with him, yelling at him, any of. Just calmly back off safely, call the cops, and go from there.

I can hold my own, I'm often armed, but had that happened to me I would've done exactly that. It's not like the nut was going to have a sudden flash of sanity after being yelled at and apologize for his actions.
 
2013-03-25 07:15:10 AM  
Karon's childhood friend remembered him fondly, saying, "I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
 
2013-03-25 07:35:28 AM  

7th Son of a 7th Son: Who the fark names their kid "Karon" ?


Nyx and Erebus?
 
2013-03-25 07:48:05 AM  

Pointy Tail of Satan: In theory, anyone who kills is mentally ill. Even soldiers, who are basically taught to be selective, part time psychopaths. That's why the legal test is knowing right or wrong, not mental state.


In theory, anyone who lives in Detroit is mentally ill.  Even the city council and all other city government elected officials should have their heads examined.  That's why the legal test should include the patient's address for their mental state.
 
2013-03-25 08:00:39 AM  

Lee Jackson Beauregard: So where are the trolls from the stop-and-frisk thread?  OK, I plonked one of them, but still there were others.


Give it up, dude. Farkkk.com's "hate speech" policy is a joke. This is a place specifically provided so pasty-faced little mommy-basement boys can vent the bigotry in safety that would get their soft, pink little asses kicked in real life - and the mods here support it. Don't like bigotry and hate speech? Stay away from Free Republic, Stormfront, and Farkkk.com.
 
2013-03-25 08:13:06 AM  

7th Son of a 7th Son: Who the fark names their kid "Karon" ?


You should hear about how his brother, Sue, ended up.
 
2013-03-25 08:18:27 AM  
Karon Anderson was a good man.  He demonstrated on many occasions that he had a good heart, and that he was the rare person who cared for and watched out for strangers.  Although he died at a young age, he died as a hero and should be remembered as such.  It is horrifically sad that his life was taken as he was doing his best to "do the right thing," something rarely done by any of our so-called leaders.  The loss is certainly a great loss for his family and all who knew him, and we must include Detroit and society as a whole who has also suffered this loss.

/God Bless Karon Anderson for putting his life on the line in order to "do the right thing" for a stranger
//the world certainly needs more people who look out for and stand up for others
///although I never knew this man, I am deeply saddened by this unnecessary tragedy
 
2013-03-25 08:41:16 AM  

Wolf892: Why are there still people living in Detroit?? That's the real question...


They are poor. They are so damndably poor that they have n choice but to stay in Detroit.
 
2013-03-25 08:57:14 AM  

LiteWerk: Karon Anderson was a good man.  He demonstrated on many occasions that he had a good heart, and that he was the rare person who cared for and watched out for strangers.  Although he died at a young age, he died as a hero and should be remembered as such.  It is horrifically sad that his life was taken as he was doing his best to "do the right thing," something rarely done by any of our so-called leaders.  The loss is certainly a great loss for his family and all who knew him, and we must include Detroit and society as a whole who has also suffered this loss.

/God Bless Karon Anderson for putting his life on the line in order to "do the right thing" for a stranger
//the world certainly needs more people who look out for and stand up for others
///although I never knew this man, I am deeply saddened by this unnecessary tragedy


THIS

+1

 
2013-03-25 09:10:23 AM  
RIP Chris Chambers
i1343.photobucket.com
 
2013-03-25 09:16:02 AM  

LiteWerk: Karon Anderson was a good man.  He demonstrated on many occasions that he had a good heart, and that he was the rare person who cared for and watched out for strangers.  Although he died at a young age, he died as a hero and should be remembered as such.  It is horrifically sad that his life was taken as he was doing his best to "do the right thing," something rarely done by any of our so-called leaders.  The loss is certainly a great loss for his family and all who knew him, and we must include Detroit and society as a whole who has also suffered this loss.

/God Bless Karon Anderson for putting his life on the line in order to "do the right thing" for a stranger
//the world certainly needs more people who look out for and stand up for others
///although I never knew this man, I am deeply saddened by this unnecessary tragedy


Well said.  RIP, Mr. Anderson.  Your last actions are the ones by which the world will remember you, and rightly so.
 
2013-03-25 09:18:22 AM  

lantawa: LiteWerk: Karon Anderson was a good man.  He demonstrated on many occasions that he had a good heart, and that he was the rare person who cared for and watched out for strangers.  Although he died at a young age, he died as a hero and should be remembered as such.  It is horrifically sad that his life was taken as he was doing his best to "do the right thing," something rarely done by any of our so-called leaders.  The loss is certainly a great loss for his family and all who knew him, and we must include Detroit and society as a whole who has also suffered this loss.

/God Bless Karon Anderson for putting his life on the line in order to "do the right thing" for a stranger
//the world certainly needs more people who look out for and stand up for others
///although I never knew this man, I am deeply saddened by this unnecessary tragedy

THIS

+1


I ask people on here (Farkers and Farkettes)  to remember it is possible that family members or friends and acquaintances of the deceased may be reading this.  Even though this is Fark, I think that needs to be said.

And, thank you, Iantawa, for the gift of one month of TotalFark.  It's greatly appreciated.
 
2013-03-25 09:34:32 AM  

Tozmo: I live in the suburbs here (adjacent suburbs, not the ones with large separation from the city)

Who knows what would have happened anyway, but why the hell were two white hipsters on a Detroit city bus?  Public transportation here is not like other cities.

If you are the type of person who reads Fark, then you do not belong on a Detroit bus.  If you are a hipster, you do not get on a Detroit bus even in an ironic "I can ride these buses" way.  You will end up dead or penniless.


How is this the fault of the white hipsters and not the scum bags who make Detroit uninhabitable? This is farking stupid. If you're going to turn your city into such a shiat hole that people of certain races or backgrounds can't ride the bus, your city should be burned to the farking ground. Stop making excuses.
 
2013-03-25 09:56:21 AM  

Wolf892: Why are there still people living in Detroit?? That's the real question...


Trik: it's time to close Detroit
relocating everyone has got to be cheaper than trying to keep it solvent, safe and liveable


archichris: Honest to god why do people live in these cities?



Because we are fans of Friedrich Nietzsche!

"Believe me! The secret of reaping the greatest fruitfulness and the greatest enjoyment from life is to live dangerously!"

/The beaten path is for beaten men
 
2013-03-25 10:08:24 AM  

hootkr: Tozmo: I live in the suburbs here (adjacent suburbs, not the ones with large separation from the city)

Who knows what would have happened anyway, but why the hell were two white hipsters on a Detroit city bus?  Public transportation here is not like other cities.

If you are the type of person who reads Fark, then you do not belong on a Detroit bus.  If you are a hipster, you do not get on a Detroit bus even in an ironic "I can ride these buses" way.  You will end up dead or penniless.

How is this the fault of the white hipsters and not the scum bags who make Detroit uninhabitable? This is farking stupid. If you're going to turn your city into such a shiat hole that people of certain races or backgrounds can't ride the bus, your city should be burned to the farking ground. Stop making excuses.


Would it have helped if the white couple went to the back of the bus?  I don't get "ironic" for riding the bus part.  Are the white folks suppose to stick to the people mover so as to show their elevated state or something?  Either way Knight singled this dude out and should never be trusted in public again.  Go to jail or go to mental hospital, but never walk the streets again.  Anderson showed that just because you are a convicted felon, you can be a good citizen too.  Of course he never randomly stabbed someone on the bus.  I don't buy Knight's account of him being stabbed, he likely did that himself.
 
2013-03-25 11:58:08 AM  

BarkingUnicorn: As for "hero," I'll remind everyone again:  a hero is just the protagonist in a morality tale, not necessarily a great person.  Anderson is, indeed, the hero of this tale.  The moral is, "Defend the helpless."


Two things:
1) That isn't the only definition; according to a couple dictionaries I just looked the word up in, it's not even the primary one.
2) If you have to "remind everyone again" about the "correct" definition of a word; it's you who is using it incorrectly.  A word is defined based on how everyone uses it and meanings evolve over time.

I don't understand why this is (grammatically) the hill to die on.  It's not even like "literally", a word whose traditionalist devotees I have empathy for, where you're taking away a unique and interesting meaning and replacing it with one that is duplicated by many other words.  Instead, you're rejecting a definition that's rather unique and turning the word into little more than a nuanced synonym for "protagonist".
 
2013-03-25 01:23:19 PM  

MaritimeGirl: "Andrea Williams, the mother of one of Knight's two sons, said Knight was mentally ill."

I'm thinking she is as well.  What sane woman would think, "This man is insane, I must be impregnated by him."?


More than you would think.
 
2013-03-25 02:20:21 PM  
This wouldn't have happened if only they had let OCP demolish Detroit and build Delta City.
 
2013-03-25 02:38:24 PM  

meanmutton: BarkingUnicorn: As for "hero," I'll remind everyone again:  a hero is just the protagonist in a morality tale, not necessarily a great person.  Anderson is, indeed, the hero of this tale.  The moral is, "Defend the helpless."

Two things:
1) That isn't the only definition; according to a couple dictionaries I just looked the word up in, it's not even the primary one.
2) If you have to "remind everyone again" about the "correct" definition of a word; it's you who is using it incorrectly.  A word is defined based on how everyone uses it and meanings evolve over time.

I don't understand why this is (grammatically) the hill to die on.  It's not even like "literally", a word whose traditionalist devotees I have empathy for, where you're taking away a unique and interesting meaning and replacing it with one that is duplicated by many other words.  Instead, you're rejecting a definition that's rather unique and turning the word into little more than a nuanced synonym for "protagonist".


It's the original definition and the one still formally taught.  But the main reason I push it is to counter the endless offensive bickering about who's a "true hero."
 
2013-03-25 03:44:53 PM  
Detroit could use a personal tag. Maybe depressing [or sad] will do.
 
2013-03-25 06:45:03 PM  
I like the part where the article gave both sides of the story.
 
Displayed 41 of 91 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report