do me proud nyc jury pool

  • Hohsia [he/him]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    722 days ago

    Wall to wall coverage over a ghoul being rightfully merked+ an expedited terrorist charge

    School shooting yesterday and it’s already old news

    The bourgeois keep showing us who are they are and we never learn

    • Rom [he/him]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      362 days ago

      Not to mention the ongoing genocide they’re completely ignoring.

    • DragonBallZinn [he/him]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      182 days ago

      The only thing keeping Madison’s shooting relevant is this time the shooter’s not a man so people are doing a victory lap in agendaposting.

  • @lambalicious
    link
    English
    1112 days ago

    Okay lemme understand it.

    “Terrorism” is defined as using violent means to scare or suppress the population.

    But what he did made the population happy.

    So… shouldn’t it be considered that he provided a public service?

    • Bob Robertson IX
      link
      fedilink
      English
      422 days ago

      That is not the definition of terrorism.

      Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups to further ideological goals stemming from domestic influences, such as those of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature

      Source: https://www.fbi.gov/investigate/terrorism

        • JustSo [she/her, any]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          312 days ago

          Yeah to be accurate the definition should probably spell out that this violent action comes from agents operating outside of a majority-backed monopoly on violence. Terrorist vs freedom fighter n all that.

          • Mindfury [he/him]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            212 days ago

            Unfortunately implied by the “criminal” part of the definition

            Violent, criminal acts

            As the violence enacted by the state is supposedly supported by the laws they legislate, they get to skirt out of terrorism designation by being definitionally unable to commit “criminal” acts when they commit violent ones

            • JustSo [she/her, any]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              82 days ago

              Oh yeah good point.

              Damn, if only we had some sort of international body that could bring charges against states for their terroristic crimes.

        • CthulhusIntern [he/him]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          122 days ago

          They made sure to make sure that it doesn’t apply to state actors. After 9/11, they felt they needed to come up with a definition of terrorism. They had a VERY hard time coming up with a definition that didn’t apply to themselves.

      • polpotkin [none/use name]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        382 days ago

        I am a jaywalker, and this is my manifesto. We will not obey the little green man. The red hand will not contain us.

        Every step we take is a middle finger to your order, a crack in your illusion of control. We disrupt your flow, we shatter your calm, and we dare your machines to stop us. Your brakes screech, your tempers flare, and your systems falter—all because we walked.

        You call it unsafe. We call it liberation. You call it reckless. We call it revolution.

        We are the chaos in your commute, the stress in your steering wheel, and the violence in your precious order.

        We are jaywalkers. Your streets will never be safe again.

      • @lambalicious
        link
        English
        172 days ago

        Curious, that describes health insurance companies. As well as various parties decrying the killing of the CEO.

      • @lambalicious
        link
        English
        1
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, …

        1.- Does he owe allegiance to the United States? How is that even defined? I don’t see how “adoctrinating children to the pledge of alliance” counts, since it’s, well, indoctrination, not allegiance.

        2.- Did he levy war against them? To my understatement, he is not a sovereign representative and even if such he has not filed a declaration of war.

        3.- If not, what enemy of the US did he adhere to? The only reasonable interpretarion I can see here is that he adhered to The People, and thus legally the US State considers The People of the US an enemy.

        • abc [he/him, comrade/them]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 day ago

          1.- Does he owe allegiance to the United States? How is that even defined? I don’t see how “adoctrinating children to the pledge of alliance” counts, since it’s, well, indoctrination, not allegiance.

          spongebob-wait Selective Service Act (which he probably did sign up with given men are supposed to when they turn 18, for FASFA and whatnot)

          I mean also not to mention the fact he’s a citizen - and if a citizen can be (and has been in the past) charged with treason which also uses that language, the argument that ‘I don’t owe allegiance to the US’ kinda falls apart:

          Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

    • darkcalling [comrade/them, she/her]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      252 days ago

      They will almost certainly ask them questions about biases regarding health insurance during jury selection and somehow manage to find 12 law-loving, boot-licking people who’ve never been screwed over by insurance, don’t have any negative feelings towards insurance companies because of someone they know being screwed over. I mean it would really be as simple as finding a dozen retired boomers who held union jobs with good benefits all their lives, are retired on cushy amounts of retirement funds, and are absolutely law and order freaks.

      • regul [any]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        182 days ago

        Defense attorney would have to be the worst of all time to somehow not be able to get one person fucked over by health insurance on a full panel.

        • darkcalling [comrade/them, she/her]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 day ago

          So much cope. He’s going down. He’s going to be convicted. The American legal system serves the bourgeoisie. Impartiality of a jury means not prejudiced against or FOR the perpetrator so they can absolutely get people struck for holding unorthodox opinions and not being totally certain of being able to rule on the facts of the charges without prejudice to any feelings they may have for the victim or defendant and their motives.

          At the end you’ll probably have some juror anonymously speak to the papers, say they sympathized because they know someone who was fucked over by insurance BUUUT they can’t justify murder and they weren’t asked to rule on whether the defendant’s actions were morally right or wrong but whether they amounted to murder and that they had to find them guilty as a result of the evidence. No one is going to do jury nullification on this, no one but extremely online leftists, judges, and prosecutors know what that even is and most Americans are the most obedient little piggies who will believe the judge when they instruct them they have to rule on the facts of the charges not their opinions. You can bet if someone tries to do jury nullification the judge will grill the fuck out of them, really, really pressure them in a case like this and most people who got that far would crumble and with some grumbling go along with voting guilty at last.

          Terrorism charge is just kind of make an example out of him type of thing, good chance they can’t make that stick if he has a good legal team but they want to send a message that the state will hit anyone with the full book who dares to do something like this and not everyone will have the types of lawyers to beat such charges.

        • @Bureaucrat@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          2
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          The prosecution is gonna go ahead with the “south park attack” wherein they point out that all murders are terroism since some people will be terrorized.

  • Evilphd666 [he/him, comrade/them]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    26
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    C-class is a protected suit now? Because I only feel financially terrorized by the healthcare industry. It is so systemic and prevalant people are afraid to go see a doctor over anything until it becomes catastrophic, and even then it’s “please for the love of all do not involve and ambulance”.

    Americans are terrorized by the thought of the massive debt for just the ride to the hospitals and basic stabilization - more so than their disloged limbs and bleeding out from a car crash.

    Personal medical piss off this last week -

    Husband burnt himself on hot coffee at work going to his car to take his break. 2 2nd degree blisters. One about 4 inches. I pleaded with him to 1- tell his job for workmans comp or at least 2 - we have insurance go see urgent care and have a doctor look at it and get an opinions. He was afraid of the costs.

    Then he was denied the HPV vaccine coverage while I’m on my 2nd of 3 doses and it’s fully covered and it’s a ridiculous $500 a dose that probably costs less than $10 to make. It’s basically a cancer vaccine. You’d think it’s cheaper than cancer treatment reguardless. Don’t know if it’s because he’s over the ‘recommended age’ by a couple years (like the vax magically stops working then) or if because us-foreign-policy. I’m going to have to call and find out WTF the deny-defend-depose was for.

    • @Bureaucrat@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      41 day ago

      Because I only feel financially terrorized by the healthcare industry.

      This reminds me of how when Cuba nationalized the fruit companies land, they paid them back what the fruit companies had had the land valued at. That value was much lower than a fair valuation, because it meant the companies would have to pay lower taxes on the land.
      Maybe someday in a better world, this case will be used as precedent to persecute capitalists. Could be fun.