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.

(Opposing Views)   Bank robber's official defense: "Since the banks had been bailed out and the people had not, I was going to confiscate money from US Bank in Jackson, Wyoming, and redistribute it to the poor and homeless in America. And that's what I did"   (opposingviews.com) divider line 196
    More: Spiffy, Wyoming, Corey Donaldson, U.S. District, bank robbery, branch manager, homeless  
•       •       •

8745 clicks; posted to Main » on 01 May 2013 at 5:31 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-05-01 06:31:29 PM

Communist_Manifesto: The reason people don't have a problem with stealing from banks is because the banks may have farked up the entire world economy and caused a lot of grief/harm to people.


Actual bank are merely entities, it's the people who control the banks who did all of these things.

Can I go out and start murdering them? It is, after all, comeuppance.

Communist_Manifesto: the people at that bank in Wyoming probably had nothing to do with the actions of the bank at large, but I can at least understand both robbing it and being okay with the guy doing it.


Gangbangers in America are responsible for the death of lots of innocents. If I have a relative who dies in a drive-by, can I just walk up to any gang-banger and shoot him in the head? After all, it might not be this individual who is responsible, but well he's in a group responsible for most of these crimes.
 
2013-05-01 06:31:58 PM

mod3072: If those homeless bums wanted a bailout, they should have hired better lobbyists.


Yay!
 
2013-05-01 06:35:16 PM

scottydoesntknow: The Stealth Hippopotamus: Steals from the government (as he sees it) and give to the people


That is actually Robin Hood!

I say give him a bow and a target with an arrow in the bullseye. If he can split the arrow with his shot, then let him off.


Agreed, but only if he fires one arrow into the air, hits that arrow with a second arrow and the first arrow ends up splitting the arrow on the bullseye.
 
2013-05-01 06:37:54 PM

Tatsuma: Treygreen13: I'm sure the glowing praise of the anonymous internet cellar-dwellers will comfort this guy as he prepares to go to jail for a decade.

Seriously everyone who posted things like that have to be basically cellar-dwellers with very little impact on society, this is a beyond farked-up mentality to have.


It's kinda like when prison guards look the other way while jail-mates beat the shiat out of child molesters.  They had it coming.
 
2013-05-01 06:37:55 PM

Tatsuma: Communist_Manifesto: The reason people don't have a problem with stealing from banks is because the banks may have farked up the entire world economy and caused a lot of grief/harm to people.

Actual bank are merely entities, it's the people who control the banks who did all of these things.

Can I go out and start murdering them? It is, after all, comeuppance.

Communist_Manifesto: the people at that bank in Wyoming probably had nothing to do with the actions of the bank at large, but I can at least understand both robbing it and being okay with the guy doing it.

Gangbangers in America are responsible for the death of lots of innocents. If I have a relative who dies in a drive-by, can I just walk up to any gang-banger and shoot him in the head? After all, it might not be this individual who is responsible, but well he's in a group responsible for most of these crimes.


I said nothing about justifying homicide mr. strawman.
 
2013-05-01 06:39:07 PM

HellRaisingHoosier: Good. We need this and the public execution of bank and finance executives who have negativly hurt the United States and her people.

[i234.photobucket.com image 470x331]


Nah, life with the luxury of a supermax prison would be far more fitting.
 
2013-05-01 06:39:15 PM

links136: It's kinda like when prison guards look the other way while jail-mates beat the shiat out of child molesters. They had it coming.


No, no it's not. It's not the same thing at all.

Communist_Manifesto: I said nothing about justifying homicide mr. strawman.


Oh so only crimes that might lead to murder, like robbing a bank, are justified, but not straight up murder?
 
2013-05-01 06:40:48 PM

Communist_Manifesto: Tatsuma: Treygreen13: I'm sure the glowing praise of the anonymous internet cellar-dwellers will comfort this guy as he prepares to go to jail for a decade.

Seriously everyone who posted things like that have to be basically cellar-dwellers with very little impact on society, this is a beyond farked-up mentality to have.

The reason people don't have a problem with stealing from banks is because the banks may have farked up the entire world economy and caused a lot of grief/harm to people. It's called comeuppance and since no governmental authority has done jack shiat to provide said comeuppance, people will tend to look the other way when shiat like this happens regardless if this guys motives were exactly as he said they were. It may not be right, the people at that bank in Wyoming probably had nothing to do with the actions of the bank at large, but I can at least understand both robbing it and being okay with the guy doing it.


This is why I'm okay with people redirecting their anger towards Obama for screwups.

More often than not it's congress, but he's a symbol of government and government has been helping corporations screw us over for the longest time.

THANKS, OBUMMER!
 
2013-05-01 06:40:48 PM

Tatsuma: links136: It's kinda like when prison guards look the other way while jail-mates beat the shiat out of child molesters. They had it coming.

No, no it's not. It's not the same thing at all.

Communist_Manifesto: I said nothing about justifying homicide mr. strawman.

Oh so only crimes that might lead to murder, like robbing a bank, are justified, but not straight up murder?


I never said the guy was justified, I even said it wasn't right. Go fark yourself troll
 
2013-05-01 06:40:59 PM
The sad thing is that 140K is a mere burp to the bank.
 
2013-05-01 06:45:17 PM

King Something: scottydoesntknow: The Stealth Hippopotamus: Steals from the government (as he sees it) and give to the people


That is actually Robin Hood!

I say give him a bow and a target with an arrow in the bullseye. If he can split the arrow with his shot, then let him off.

Agreed, but only if he fires one arrow into the air, hits that arrow with a second arrow and the first arrow ends up splitting the arrow on the bullseye.


Well, I know what I'm trying after work....
 
2013-05-01 06:45:53 PM

timujin: Ned Stark: Acquit.

I'd say this is an excellent case for jury nullification, but he's not allowed to discuss his motives.  Also, what's up with that shiat?  If he'd killed some dude because he was sleeping with his wife, the prosecution could use that motivation as evidence.


I'm not sure what the state has to prove - I'm on my phone so I don't feel like GIS. Basically, motive is particularly important when it's needed to convict someone of a crime. That's left up to state/federal law so it isn't consistent.

Ex. Motive/Intent can mean the difference between negligent homicide and first degree. There's a difference between letting your notoriously aggressive dog kill your neighbor and stabbing her to death.
 
2013-05-01 06:45:53 PM

Tatsuma: Calmamity: Good. Fu*k banks.

Oldiron_79: Im ok with this

phlatulence: Hero tag cringing under bank teller desk somewhere?

Ned Stark: Acquit.

ToastTheRabbit: [media.tumblr.com image 500x276]

libranoelrose: He didn't give me any money, but I still support what he did.

Warlordtrooper: I'd like to buy this guy a beer.

AugieDoggyDaddy: Yep,  the world would be better  if we got rid of all the banks.


... what the fark is wrong with you people?

This man robbed a bank, kept tens of thousands of dollars for himself, probably hid away some more, gave thousands to his friends, but because he said 'fark bailouts' and gave some to other homeless people (who happen to be personal friends, as he was himself homeless), suddenly what he did is heroic and justified?

What the fark.


If the government had gone after even one person in the mortage and banking scandal, I would not be sympathetic to his argument.  Since NOT ONE FARKING PERSON was even investigated, I say his actions were reasonable.

Yes, he robbed a bank for a couple of hundred thousand.  I'm more concerned with the billions robbed by politically protected rich bastards.  And I'm a libertarian who never goes the "fark the rich bastard" route.
 
2013-05-01 06:46:13 PM

Communist_Manifesto: I never said the guy was justified, I even said it wasn't right. Go fark yourself troll


You said you could empathize with it earlier and 'while you might not be ok', not stating whether you actually were or not.

And please, do you even know what a troll is? Hint: much like hipster, the definition is not 'everything I loathe and despise'
 
2013-05-01 06:46:55 PM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: insertsnarkyusername: What minority owned banks exist?

There has to be one, right?


Jews are minorities.
 
2013-05-01 06:49:59 PM
Willie Sutton unavailable for comment
 
2013-05-01 06:50:34 PM

Tatsuma: links136: It's kinda like when prison guards look the other way while jail-mates beat the shiat out of child molesters. They had it coming.

No, no it's not. It's not the same thing at all.

Communist_Manifesto: I said nothing about justifying homicide mr. strawman.

Oh so only crimes that might lead to murder, like robbing a bank, are justified, but not straight up murder?


Are you kidding?  Private banks have decayed society to the point of collapse.  Frankly, they should all be charged with treason and have banks nationalized.

Wouldn't mind the french revolution either.
 
2013-05-01 06:51:25 PM

Tatsuma: Communist_Manifesto: I never said the guy was justified, I even said it wasn't right. Go fark yourself troll

You said you could empathize with it earlier and 'while you might not be ok', not stating whether you actually were or not.

And please, do you even know what a troll is? Hint: much like hipster, the definition is not 'everything I loathe and despise'


Empathy:
1.  the imaginative of a subjective state into an object so that the object appears to be infused with it

2.  the action of understanding, being aware of, being sensitive to, and experiencing the feelings, thoughts, and experience of another of either the past or present without having the feelings, thoughts, and experience fully communicated in an objectively manner;  also: the capacity for this

The reason people don't have a problem with stealing from banks is because the banks may have farked up the entire world economy and caused a lot of grief/harm to people. It's called comeuppance and since no governmental authority has done jack shiat to provide said comeuppance, people will tend to look the other way when shiat like this happens regardless if this guys motives were exactly as he said they were. It may not be right, the people at that bank in Wyoming probably had nothing to do with the actions of the bank at large, but I can at least understand both robbing it and being okay with the guy doing it.

I never condoned his actions. You apparently don't know what the word empathy means. So I guess if you're not a troll you're just a straight up moron. Don't bother responding, I'm not going to respond to someone who doesn't even understand the concept of empathy.
 
2013-05-01 06:51:46 PM

Tatsuma: Communist_Manifesto: I never said the guy was justified, I even said it wasn't right. Go fark yourself troll

You said you could empathize with it earlier and 'while you might not be ok', not stating whether you actually were or not.


Dude, do you even read the comments of the people you argue with?  Here is what C_M actually said:

It may not be right, the people at that bank in Wyoming probably had nothing to do with the actions of the bank at large, but I can at least understand both robbing it and being okay with the guy doing it.

He's saying he can see why some people would root for the bad guy in this case, even when it's not right to do so.  Nothing more.  Calm down and have another donut.
 
2013-05-01 06:51:54 PM
So in other words, this guy blatantly confessed to it, and gave the judge every reason to sentence him not only for armed robbery, but to even tack on terrorism charges as well for it being politically motivated.

BRILLIANT.

I bet that defense attorney sat down with a facepalm after he had to tell the jury that.
 
2013-05-01 06:51:59 PM

Tatsuma: Communist_Manifesto: I never said the guy was justified, I even said it wasn't right. Go fark yourself troll

You said you could empathize with it earlier and 'while you might not be ok', not stating whether you actually were or not.

And please, do you even know what a troll is? Hint: much like hipster, the definition is not 'everything I loathe and despise'


You don't understand.

Just because something is wrong doesn't mean you can't sympathize with it.

For example, if one of your family members were assaulted, it's only natural that you go out and seek revenge.

It's just in this case you ended up beating the kid brother of the guy who committed the actual assault.  But they're in the same family so it's close enough.
 
2013-05-01 06:59:21 PM

teenage mutant ninja rapist: Stick it to the man. Fark banks and bankers


And, well, the rest of us eventually. It's not like the money doesn't come out of the taxpayers' pockets sooner or later.
 
2013-05-01 06:59:24 PM

Bontesla: timujin: Ned Stark: Acquit.

I'd say this is an excellent case for jury nullification, but he's not allowed to discuss his motives.  Also, what's up with that shiat?  If he'd killed some dude because he was sleeping with his wife, the prosecution could use that motivation as evidence.

I'm not sure what the state has to prove - I'm on my phone so I don't feel like GIS. Basically, motive is particularly important when it's needed to convict someone of a crime. That's left up to state/federal law so it isn't consistent.

Ex. Motive/Intent can mean the difference between negligent homicide and first degree. There's a difference between letting your notoriously aggressive dog kill your neighbor and stabbing her to death.


Which is kind of my point.  If the prosecution can use that difference in motive, why isn't the defense allowed use the difference between "that's where the money is" and "I'm Robin Hood incarnate"?  Fark lawyerly types?
 
2013-05-01 07:00:25 PM
Tatsuma:
... what the fark is wrong with you people?



Justice
 
2013-05-01 07:01:58 PM
Yeah screw bankers and the 50 year-old lady working as a bank teller making minimum wage and that digusting Bank manager making 50k a year stealing money out our pockets!

Psst you're robbing the wrong "bankers" numbnuts. And to you dumb farks showing empathy or support for this moran, fark you too for being too dense to understand the difference between a Wall Street Investment Bank and Bum-Fark Bank of Wyoming.
 
2013-05-01 07:01:59 PM

Tatsuma: Communist_Manifesto: The reason people don't have a problem with stealing from banks is because the banks may have farked up the entire world economy and caused a lot of grief/harm to people.

Actual bank are merely entities, it's the people who control the banks who did all of these things.

Can I go out and start murdering them? It is, after all, comeuppance.

Communist_Manifesto: the people at that bank in Wyoming probably had nothing to do with the actions of the bank at large, but I can at least understand both robbing it and being okay with the guy doing it.

Gangbangers in America are responsible for the death of lots of innocents. If I have a relative who dies in a drive-by, can I just walk up to any gang-banger and shoot him in the head? After all, it might not be this individual who is responsible, but well he's in a group responsible for most of these crimes.


You can start by all means.
 
2013-05-01 07:02:52 PM

Communist_Manifesto: I never condoned his actions. You apparently don't know what the word empathy means. So I guess if you're not a troll you're just a straight up moron. Don't bother responding, I'm not going to respond to someone who doesn't even understand the concept of empathy.


You said 'may not be right', 'might not agree', you did not in any way say that you actually disagreed or agreed with his actions. And if your name was not 'Communist Manifesto' I probably would have given you a lot more leeway on this. So answer:

Do you agree with what he did, or do you think he should be sent to prison?
 
2013-05-01 07:05:32 PM
reillan:
I take it as more of the same problem with the legal system in America that causes us to put 17-year-olds in prison for consensual sex with their 16-year-old girlfriends...

The idea that the law itself is paramount, and that the jury cannot question it from the courtroom.

We've forgotten that this was one of the reasons why the jury system existed in the first place - to make sure that well-intended laws weren't inappropriately applied.


YES!  I'm not sure which is more amazing -- the fact that so few people know this, or the fact that judges [who have taken oaths to uphold the Constitution] blatantly tell jurors in trials to only judge whether the law was broken, not whether they think the law is inappropriate.  Jurors are ALWAYS free to judge however they see fit, without direction from judges, except possibly for procedural issues.  Their determination of the verdict is COMPLETELY up to them.
 
2013-05-01 07:06:08 PM

OgreMagi: Tatsuma: Calmamity: Good. Fu*k banks.

Oldiron_79: Im ok with this

phlatulence: Hero tag cringing under bank teller desk somewhere?

Ned Stark: Acquit.

ToastTheRabbit: [media.tumblr.com image 500x276]

libranoelrose: He didn't give me any money, but I still support what he did.

Warlordtrooper: I'd like to buy this guy a beer.

AugieDoggyDaddy: Yep,  the world would be better  if we got rid of all the banks.


... what the fark is wrong with you people?

This man robbed a bank, kept tens of thousands of dollars for himself, probably hid away some more, gave thousands to his friends, but because he said 'fark bailouts' and gave some to other homeless people (who happen to be personal friends, as he was himself homeless), suddenly what he did is heroic and justified?

What the fark.

If the government had gone after even one person in the mortage and banking scandal, I would not be sympathetic to his argument.  Since NOT ONE FARKING PERSON was even investigated, I say his actions were reasonable.

Yes, he robbed a bank for a couple of hundred thousand.  I'm more concerned with the billions robbed by politically protected rich bastards.  And I'm a libertarian who never goes the "fark the rich bastard" route.


You know what's more disturbing? The fact no-one feels the need to hold the politicians who voted for it accountable because they are a member of the party they favor. The just pisses me right off.
 
2013-05-01 07:11:03 PM

OgreMagi: If the government had gone after even one person in the mortage and banking scandal, I would not be sympathetic to his argument. Since NOT ONE FARKING PERSON was even investigated, I say his actions were reasonable.

Yes, he robbed a bank for a couple of hundred thousand. I'm more concerned with the billions robbed by politically protected rich bastards. And I'm a libertarian who never goes the "fark the rich bastard" route.


I've got two friends who've worked as bank tellers and both of them have been robbed.  One of them was robbed at gunpoint, the other by a man with a letter who threatened to have a gun.  Both of them have had psychological damage, and the one who was robbed at gunpoint still wakes up screaming at night because of the ordeal--years later.

The fact is that what he did likely terrorized normal, everyday, common people who were just trying to make a living for their families.  The executives weren't harmed by this--even a $200k loss is a relatively paltry sum, especially considering banks carry insurance for this sort of thing.  It is the violence--and the threat of violence, as well as the psychological harm that a robbery inflicts upon people, that makes the action unexcusable.  No peaceful person should be subjected to torment in his or her efforts to make a decent living.

While some banks do make a mockery of the system, the normal folks who are trying to survive should not be punished because their bosses are evil.  To think they are is to glorify punishing the true victims of the crimes--the patrons and staff of the business targeted for theft.
 
2013-05-01 07:11:05 PM

jayphat: OgreMagi: Tatsuma: Calmamity: Good. Fu*k banks.

Oldiron_79: Im ok with this

phlatulence: Hero tag cringing under bank teller desk somewhere?

Ned Stark: Acquit.

ToastTheRabbit: [media.tumblr.com image 500x276]

libranoelrose: He didn't give me any money, but I still support what he did.

Warlordtrooper: I'd like to buy this guy a beer.

AugieDoggyDaddy: Yep,  the world would be better  if we got rid of all the banks.


... what the fark is wrong with you people?

This man robbed a bank, kept tens of thousands of dollars for himself, probably hid away some more, gave thousands to his friends, but because he said 'fark bailouts' and gave some to other homeless people (who happen to be personal friends, as he was himself homeless), suddenly what he did is heroic and justified?

What the fark.

If the government had gone after even one person in the mortage and banking scandal, I would not be sympathetic to his argument.  Since NOT ONE FARKING PERSON was even investigated, I say his actions were reasonable.

Yes, he robbed a bank for a couple of hundred thousand.  I'm more concerned with the billions robbed by politically protected rich bastards.  And I'm a libertarian who never goes the "fark the rich bastard" route.

You know what's more disturbing? The fact no-one feels the need to hold the politicians who voted for it accountable because they are a member of the party they favor. The just pisses me right off.


I refuse to vote for a democrat or a republican because I don't see them any different in their actions.  So yes, I do hold the accountable.  Unfortunately, too many people are willing to let things slide for their party, as you pointed out.
 
2013-05-01 07:11:39 PM
If I were on the jury, I certainly would be going for nullification on this one.
 
2013-05-01 07:14:41 PM
His real crime is just thinking too small. You could never take enough with a gun or a bomb.

You would need a computer to really make a dent...
 
2013-05-01 07:16:19 PM

sgnilward: If I were on the jury, I certainly would be going for nullification on this one.


/which is why I have never sat on a jury, I suppose
 
2013-05-01 07:16:55 PM

rolladuck: I've got two friends who've worked as bank tellers and both of them have been robbed. One of them was robbed at gunpoint, the other by a man with a letter who threatened to have a gun. Both of them have had psychological damage, and the one who was robbed at gunpoint still wakes up screaming at night because of the ordeal--years later.

The fact is that what he did likely terrorized normal, everyday, common people who were just trying to make a living for their families. The executives weren't harmed by this--even a $200k loss is a relatively paltry sum, especially considering banks carry insurance for this sort of thing. It is the violence--and the threat of violence, as well as the psychological harm that a robbery inflicts upon people, that makes the action unexcusable. No peaceful person should be subjected to torment in his or her efforts to make a decent living.

While some banks do make a mockery of the system, the normal folks who are trying to survive should not be punished because their bosses are evil. To think they are is to glorify punishing the true victims of the crimes--the patrons and staff of the business targeted for theft.


They work for banks, they should be mistreated. Part of the problem and all that.
 
2013-05-01 07:18:25 PM

Treygreen13: Tatsuma: ... what the fark is wrong with you people?

This man robbed a bank, kept tens of thousands of dollars for himself, probably hid away some more, gave thousands to his friends, but because he said 'fark bailouts' and gave some to other homeless people (who happen to be personal friends, as he was himself homeless), suddenly what he did is heroic and justified?

What the fark.

I'm sure the glowing praise of the anonymous internet cellar-dwellers will comfort this guy as he prepares to go to jail for a decade.


He was homeless in Wyoming on New Years Eve. All that cold probably got him thinking he'll either pull this off or he'll get caught and get warm a cell. Win-win for him. All this Robin Hood stuff is just bullshiat anyway. He knows he's caught and he wanted to make himself look as good as he can.
 
2013-05-01 07:18:47 PM

sgnilward: If I were on the jury, I certainly would be going for nullification on this one.


So, what you're saying is if someone were to come into your place of business with a gun, corale you and your customers into a corner while his friends take all the cash and valuables they could find, that you would be okay with it, as long as you worked for in industry that had been vilified in popular media.
You are messed up.
 
2013-05-01 07:23:13 PM

Tatsuma: They work for banks, they should be mistreated. Part of the problem and all that.


You are either a pretty lousy troll, or a horribly lousy human.  I hope someday you get the pleasure of working in an unpopular company struggling to make ends meet.
Some years you take the paychecks that you can get.
 
2013-05-01 07:23:14 PM
upload.wikimedia.org
does not approve of these shenanigans
 
2013-05-01 07:24:54 PM

rolladuck: Tatsuma: They work for banks, they should be mistreated. Part of the problem and all that.

You are either a pretty lousy troll, or a horribly lousy human.  I hope someday you get the pleasure of working in an unpopular company struggling to make ends meet.
Some years you take the paychecks that you can get.


They live in [insert disliked country here], they should be mistreated. Part of the problem and all that.

May as well push a bad metaphor as far as you possibly can.
 
2013-05-01 07:26:21 PM

Tatsuma: Treygreen13: I'm sure the glowing praise of the anonymous internet cellar-dwellers will comfort this guy as he prepares to go to jail for a decade.

Seriously everyone who posted things like that have to be basically cellar-dwellers with very little impact on society, this is a beyond farked-up mentality to have.


I never thought I'd see a person who loves authority more than authority does, but here we are :/
 
2013-05-01 07:28:11 PM

titwrench: PunGent: FTA  "Last week, a U.S. District judge told Donaldson he could not argue before the jury that his actions were justified."

I'm a lawyer, but not a criminal lawyer...did this guy just get a solid issue for appeal?

It sounds as though the judge is saying kind of tounge in cheek that he can argue the legality but he is not able to admit whether or not he feels the robber was justified. A take it as a wink and a nod to the robber even though he has to do his job and upstand the law.


Even if he appeals, he's not going to be able to use that argument.  That's essentially requesting to use jury nullification as a defence.  I think only one state allows that.  If anyone could use that, I think there would be a lot less convictions.  "Yes, I had weed but it should be legal," or on the other side "Yes I hit my wife, but the biatch had it coming."  If you get 1 juror to agree with you, you've got it made.
 
2013-05-01 07:32:40 PM

Tatsuma: Treygreen13: I'm sure the glowing praise of the anonymous internet cellar-dwellers will comfort this guy as he prepares to go to jail for a decade.

Seriously everyone who posted things like that have to be basically cellar-dwellers with very little impact on society, this is a beyond farked-up mentality to have.


I know you're an old timer here, but I think you still deserve a "welcome to fark" on this one.

You're actually surprised that there are morons here defending bank robbers?
 
2013-05-01 07:34:22 PM

jayphat: OgreMagi: Tatsuma: Calmamity: Good. Fu*k banks.

Oldiron_79: Im ok with this

phlatulence: Hero tag cringing under bank teller desk somewhere?

Ned Stark: Acquit.

ToastTheRabbit: [media.tumblr.com image 500x276]

libranoelrose: He didn't give me any money, but I still support what he did.

Warlordtrooper: I'd like to buy this guy a beer.

AugieDoggyDaddy: Yep,  the world would be better  if we got rid of all the banks.


... what the fark is wrong with you people?

This man robbed a bank, kept tens of thousands of dollars for himself, probably hid away some more, gave thousands to his friends, but because he said 'fark bailouts' and gave some to other homeless people (who happen to be personal friends, as he was himself homeless), suddenly what he did is heroic and justified?

What the fark.

If the government had gone after even one person in the mortage and banking scandal, I would not be sympathetic to his argument.  Since NOT ONE FARKING PERSON was even investigated, I say his actions were reasonable.

Yes, he robbed a bank for a couple of hundred thousand.  I'm more concerned with the billions robbed by politically protected rich bastards.  And I'm a libertarian who never goes the "fark the rich bastard" route.

You know what's more disturbing? The fact no-one feels the need to hold the politicians who voted for it accountable because they are a member of the party they favor. The just pisses me right off.


Voted for what?
 
2013-05-01 07:40:53 PM

mongbiohazard: The prosecutor in that case should be happy I'm not on the jury.


Add me to this.
 
2013-05-01 07:42:21 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: jayphat: OgreMagi: Tatsuma: Calmamity: Good. Fu*k banks.

Oldiron_79: Im ok with this

phlatulence: Hero tag cringing under bank teller desk somewhere?

Ned Stark: Acquit.

ToastTheRabbit: [media.tumblr.com image 500x276]

libranoelrose: He didn't give me any money, but I still support what he did.

Warlordtrooper: I'd like to buy this guy a beer.

AugieDoggyDaddy: Yep,  the world would be better  if we got rid of all the banks.


... what the fark is wrong with you people?

This man robbed a bank, kept tens of thousands of dollars for himself, probably hid away some more, gave thousands to his friends, but because he said 'fark bailouts' and gave some to other homeless people (who happen to be personal friends, as he was himself homeless), suddenly what he did is heroic and justified?

What the fark.

If the government had gone after even one person in the mortage and banking scandal, I would not be sympathetic to his argument.  Since NOT ONE FARKING PERSON was even investigated, I say his actions were reasonable.

Yes, he robbed a bank for a couple of hundred thousand.  I'm more concerned with the billions robbed by politically protected rich bastards.  And I'm a libertarian who never goes the "fark the rich bastard" route.

You know what's more disturbing? The fact no-one feels the need to hold the politicians who voted for it accountable because they are a member of the party they favor. The just pisses me right off.

Voted for what?


That pesky TARP.
 
2013-05-01 07:45:09 PM
Oodilolly oodilolly golly what a day.
 
2013-05-01 07:48:49 PM
I'll take another moment to recommend everyone read this book:

dl.dropboxusercontent.com

When the rich and powerful aren't even prosecuted for bank fraud so extreme that it takes down the global economy, I see no reason why anyone else should be convicted of crimes involving banks.

Equal justice under the law is a very old American concept.
 
2013-05-01 07:48:53 PM

rolladuck: You are either a pretty lousy troll, or a horribly lousy human. I hope someday you get the pleasure of working in an unpopular company struggling to make ends meet.
Some years you take the paychecks that you can get.


... read the rest of the thread.
 
2013-05-01 07:50:02 PM

Debeo Summa Credo: I know you're an old timer here, but I think you still deserve a "welcome to fark" on this one.

You're actually surprised that there are morons here defending bank robbers?


I've spent most of the last two years away from fark and with nice and decent folk in an almost Pleasantville setting. It's been a bit of a shock, being back here.
 
Displayed 50 of 196 comments

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

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report