Lurker > Krazy_Kirby

isn't that the "sports" anime thats really about boys in bathing suits?

watched a couple episodes of that and then realized it wasn't a sports anime.
---

Kill From The Shadows

i would probably buy 5 gallons if it was 98c and finish them within two weeks.
---

Kill From The Shadows

helIy posted...

faramir77 posted...

helIy posted...

now it has become $0.98 a gallon.

Wtf where

In Alberta it's still $5 per 4L.

in glorious fuckin America

i believe the cheapest i see it around here is $2.39 in CA
---

Kill From The Shadows

would be nice to get a gallon of milk for even $2...

less than $1 would be great
---

Kill From The Shadows

PKMNsony posted...

Situational.

Bulls > Matador.

A good stranger > family dog.

if they are a stranger you don't know if they are good or not.
---

Kill From The Shadows

donkey kong.

pokemon red and blue is a close second.
---

Kill From The Shadows

darkknight109 posted...

Zeus posted...

In isolation, the bringing of weapons might seem less menacing if not for the fact that they first realized that somebody was at home -- which would cause a normal thief to flee -- and then were threatened with a weapon yet still didn't flee. That strongly implies something more sinister.

Possible, I suppose. Either way, it's difficult to say with certainty that they intended violence.

Cacciato posted...

Why is that the dumbest shit you've ever heard of

Because it equates being a driver for a robbery - a non-violent, relatively low-level offence that probably would not have netted her more than five years in prison had the robbery been successful - with being a serial mass-murderer, something that's has the potential to leave her in prison (and taxpayers paying for her) for the rest of her life which, given her age, could be 70+ years. That's patently ridiculous.

The driver didn't intend for anyone to get killed (does NOT matter)

and had no way of reasonably anticipating that a killing would take place (they brought knives, clearly something could have been anticipated)

; her moral culpability is low and there's nothing suggesting she would be difficult to rehabilitate. Even if you wanted to suggest she bears some blame for the deaths, I fail to see how this is first degree murder (which requires malice aforethought) as opposed to negligent homicide/involuntary manslaughter (a charge that's more typically laid when death occurs in a situation where the killer didn't intend for it to happen but bore responsibility for it). Suggesting she should go to prison for the rest of her life for being a getaway driver is an extreme overreaction and a waste of both her life and taxpayer dollars.

---

Kill From The Shadows

Zeus posted...

adjl posted...

Jackal4 posted...

The burglars got what they deserved. The part I have a problem with is the getaway driver being charged with their murder when they were willing participants just like her.

If somebody dies as a consequence of criminal activity, all involved parties in that criminal activity are on the hook for those deaths, which are typically considered murder in such cases. You see similar charges laid if a pair tries robbing a store: if one of them is killed by the owner in self-defense, the other can be charged with their murder. Those other people are dead because she drove them there, thus she is responsible for their deaths.

It's a bit of a logical stretch, yes, but it's not one I really object to.

First I've heard of that. Is it a named legal principle which I could easily look up?

Golden Road posted...

Either way, this isn't something to celebrate. It's not wrong that he shot them, but it's not like "yay, they totes deserved to die!" It's unfortunate, but who knows how it might have ended if this guy didn't shoot them.

Pretty much.

except they had clear intent to commit severe bodily harm at the very least. i don't have a problem celebrating or congratulating him. hopefully someone else will think twice before trying to rob someone.

look up felony murder rule for being charged.
---

Kill From The Shadows

Zeus posted...

Veedrock- posted...

Why does this even require "stand your ground" as a defense? Who is possibly trying to press charges against the victim?

Liberals, mostly. The UK and some other countries have gone so far to suggest a "Duty to Retreat" where, if you're being attacked by somebody intent on killing you, you have to demonstrate that you took every available effort to escape the encounter before killing them in self-defense.

Bearing in mind that even in the US, most times if you execute an already-incapacitated attacker you'll likely get in trouble over it with the possible exception of either the Castle Doctrine or Stand Your Ground. In general, though, when you're attacked within your home and retaliate that generally is seen to fall more under the Castle Doctrine whereas SYG is really intended to extend the right of the Castle Doctrine to broader self-defense outside of a property you own.

sadly in california it doesn't matter if someone breaks in and is stealing something. unless they try to attack you/someone you can get in trouble for shooting them
---

Kill From The Shadows

so like SAM in me:a
---

Kill From The Shadows