Current Events > Judge dismisses terrorism charges against Luigi

(+) Yeah! (+)

UnfairRepresent posted...

Maybe he would have killed again, maybe he would have sent cryptic messages to news stations, maybe he would have jerked off while playing Spyro 2. We don't know.

so your speculation is why it is to cause political change?

you think if he was not caught he might have copied Bin Laden?

but that didn't happen, he was on the run and caught randomly, he didn't turn himself in

UnfairRepresent posted...

Great now Wing's definition of Terrorism includes "You can't be a terrorist if you hide from the law"

I couldn't disagreee with this utter and complete nonsense any more.

I mean, if you hide from the law and left no indication why you killed the person, and so absolutely nobody has any idea why it occurred... Yeah, it'd be pretty hard to argue that's "influencing political change."

Still waiting to hear whether or not you think the IRA are terrorists.

Curious why you edit every single post to avoid answering that.

Can't think why.


WingsOfGood posted...

so your speculation is why it is to cause political change?

No the fact it was intended to cause political change is why it was intended to cause political change.

WingsOfGood posted...

you think if he was not caught he might have copied Bin Laden?

I have no idea what a crazy murderer would have done in an alternate reality and frankly have zero interest in the question.

I'll leave that to comic book writers.

But my guess would be that he would have continued to further political change that he couldn't change via proper legal channels using violence and terror.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/d/d66d9cb1.png

It's very hard to argue with this logic, tbh

LightSnake posted...

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/d/d66d9cb1.png

It's very hard to argue with this logic, tbh

Yeah, it doesn't get any more clearer than that, based on the language they tried to charge him with.

Nobody needs to make up their own definition of terrorism, now, because we can see the one they tried to use, and it didn't fit.

HashtagSEP posted...

Yeah, it doesn't get any more clearer than that, based on the language they tried to charge him with.

Yep. There's a fine line between "I hate this and want to draw attention" to "terrorize and coerce a populace." Especially when it's just one murder.

Lol like civilians were "intimidated" by this. Literally had the media stop talking about Luigi because they're sympathetic towards him.

UnfairRepresent posted...

That's a bullshit definition and you know it.

By your logic if anarchists blow up Donald Trump , that's not terrorism because its not random and they have a grudge

Face facts. If Luigi was a brown Muslim called Muhammad Aziz, he'd be considered a terrorist

if it was a black guy from Detroit with ties to BLM called Tryone Steel, he'd be considered a terrorist

If it was a Chinese national called Hsu Hao, he'd be considered a terrorist

It's violence and murder with the distinct goal of causing political change through fear.

That's as clear cut as it gets. Luigi is a terrorist. He only got off because of racism

I can't get over Tyrone Steel.

UnfairRepresent posted...

No the fact it was intended to cause political change is why it was intended to cause political change.

lol

HashtagSEP posted...

Yeah, it doesn't get any more clearer than that, based on the language they tried to charge him with.

Nobody needs to make up their own definition of terrorism, now, because we can see the one they tried to use, and it didn't fit.

Wings literally did just that and you defended him

LightSnake posted...

Yep. There's a fine line between "I hate this and want to draw attention" to "terrorize and coerce a populace." Especially when it's just one murder.

"It's just one murder" (Hell of a sentence btw) because he was caught.

Also terrorism doesn't have to singularly mean "Terrorize the whole population." Guy Fawkes certainly did not. Guys firebombing abortion clinics don't either.

It's trying to cause political change you can't enact through legitimate channels via violence and terror. That's terrorism.

"The unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims."

There is nothing in there that says an entire populace needs to effected. WTF.

The IRA wanted to draw attention to Irish Reunification. Star Trek even shouted them out

Bro, there's no evidence he was planning a mass killing spree, you don't charge people based on "we can't be sure if you would've stopped" what is that.

Also, what is with you citing examples you have clearly no idea of the context of? Guy Fawkes intended to set up a Catholic Theocracy! He absolutely intended to "terrorize the whole population!"

And abortion bombers, by definition, seek to intimidate people from getting abortions. Stop.

You do realize that you don't get to shop around for a definition that works after you've already charged under something specific, right.

They made a specific argument, and it did not meet that argument. Period.

LightSnake posted...

Bro, there's no evidence he was planning a mass killing spree, you don't charge people based on "we can't be sure if you would've stopped" what is that.

I agree. I said so earlier. Speculating what happens in an alternate reality is silly

My point was "He only did one terrorist act before he was caught." doesn't mean he isn't a terrorist. It means he was caught after only 1 act.

Also, what is with you citing examples you have clearly no idea of the context of? Guy Fawkes intended to set up a Catholic Theocracy! He absolutely intended to "terrorize the whole population!"

And abortion bombers, by definition, seek to intimidate people from getting abortions. Stop.

None of those are the entire population. They're political causes that can't be achieved via legitimate means, being forwarded via violence and terror.

That's exactly what Luigi was trying to do. Why do you think every major healthcare/Insurance CEO/Exec had extra security for a while. They were shitting themselves. Luigi was trying to change how the US healthcare system works via violence.

That's undeniable.

Also yet again avoiding the IRA. I'm noticing that pattern. They don't fit at all with your twisted definitions do they?

Can I please have an explanation for how "blow up the governing governmental body to set up a theocracy" is not an attempt to intimidate the entire population?

Also you really do not wanna cite the group that bombed airports, nightclubs to intimidate the British

HashtagSEP posted...

You do realize that you don't get to shop around for a definition that works after you've already charged under something specific, right.

Shop around for a definition?

Dude that's the fucking dictionary. That's the definition used by everyone in our lifetimes. It was Wings who made up bullshit that included "You're not a terrorist if you hide from the law" and you defended him while attacking me

You're such a hypocrite man.

UnfairRepresent posted...

Shop around for a definition?

Dude that's the fucking dictionary. That's the definition used by everyone in our lifetimes. It was Wings who made up bullshit that included "You're not a terrorist if you hide from the law" and you defended him while attacking me

You're such a hypocrite man.

Did you even read the explanation, or are you just so far up in your feels you have no idea what is being talked about, now?

The prosecutor made a specific argument for terrorism. It did not meet that criteria.

HashtagSEP posted...

Did you even read the explanation, or are you just so far up in your feels you have no idea what is being talked about, now?

The prosecutor made a specific argument for terrorism. It did not meet that criteria.

Literally my second post in the topic:

UnfairRepresent posted...

He murdered a guy in cold blood to push for political change in the healthcare system via fear of violence

Maybe there's legalese for criminal proceedings but for all common parlance that's 100% terrorism

This has gotten fucking tiresome.

Here is the statute:

1. A person is guilty of a crime of terrorism when, with intent to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, influence the policy of a unit of government by intimidation or coercion, or affect the conduct of a unit of government by murder, assassination or kidnapping, he or she commits a specified offense.
2. Sentencing.
(a) When a person is convicted of a crime of terrorism pursuant to this section, and the specified offense is a class B, C, D or E felony offense, the crime of terrorism shall be deemed a violent felony offense.

this didn't fit that. Move on

UnfairRepresent posted...

Literally my second post in the topic:

The specific argument that you went on to make multiple times was that he only got off because "He's white and attractive," so..

Except it did

And Luigi is a terorist.

Also love that your quote includes Assinassation when maybe not you but Wings and Hash were passionately arguing that assassination can't be terrorism

HashtagSEP posted...

The specific argument that you went on to make multiple times was that he only got off because "He's white and attractive," so..

Well yeah. That's true.

Remember the Bundy standoff? Remember Jan 6th? Remember Malheur National Wildlife Refuge?

Now do you remember the MOVE bombings?

As we speak the Supreme Court have declared that visusal assumption of someone's race is cause for ICE to detain people without due process.

If you want to argue America doesn't have an insanely documented history of racism in it's poitical and legal sphere then go ahead. But you're wrong and we both know you're wrong.

with intent to intimidate or coerce a civilian population

This did not fit in that definition. That is the statute.

The person choosing to engage in you.

UnfairRepresent posted...

Hash were passionately arguing that assassination can't be terrorism

Was I, now? Where?

UnfairRepresent posted...

He murdered a guy in cold blood to push for political change in the healthcare system via fear of violence

what political change in the healthcare system was sought?

you won't be able to answer this because he was not a terrorist

Recap:

"I am doing this so you all see how evil he is and pay attention so you change the system!" = not terrorism by NY statute.

"I am doing this so you'll all be scared it could happen to you and change it so it doesn't!" = Terrorism by NY statute

LightSnake posted...

with intent to intimidate or coerce a civilian population

This did not fit in that definition. That is the statute.

Well that's debatable but it did try to cause a change in the political US healthcare system via unlawful violence and terror.

If you need to edit your own definition to remove the part that hurts your own statement, then you've already lost

WingsOfGood posted...

what political change in the healthcare system was sought?

you won't be able to answer this because he was not a terrorist

https://rb.gy/ggcbzk

People like him not getting the care or coverage they want, claims being declined, the blatant corruption and greed by healthcare and insurance companies. The crippling pain he was left in.

The stuff he openly talks about.

UnfairRepresent posted...

Except it did

And Luigi is a terorist.

Also love that your quote includes Assinassation when maybe not you but Wings and Hash were passionately arguing that assassination can't be terrorism

OK. I'll play. Per #118 here, a terrorism charge in this case needed

1) intent to intimidate/coerce a civilian population, or

2) intent to influence government policy by intimidation/coercion, or

3) intent to affect government conduct by murder, assassination, or kidnapping

in addition to the "specified offense" (murder in this case, and not under dispute).

Items 2 and 3 here are clearly impossible, because there is no link to government conduct or policy. So the prosecution was left only with item 1, and it's somewhat farcical to regard a single murder (and a highly targeted one at that) as having intent to intimidate/coerce the population.

LightSnake posted...

Recap:

"I am doing this so you all see how evil he is and pay attention so you change the system!" = not terrorism by NY statute.

"I am doing this so you'll all be scared it could happen to you and change it so it doesn't!" = Terrorism by NY statute

Maybe for specific legalese (and even that I think is very highly debatable and Luigi would not have got away with it if not for specific circumstances) but not for every day facts and common parlence

"The unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims."

^ That's terrorism

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

Yeah I took him off and he started his "America supports this" gimmick and I was like "nah" and put him back

and what relevance does that have to New York's penal code?

LightSnake posted...

and what relevance does that have to New York's penal code?

That would be a big, fat zero.

HighSeraph posted...

Yeah I took him off and he started his "America supports this" gimmick and I was like "nah" and put him back

It's not a gimmick

America voted in Donald Trump and there has been no real oppoistion to his repeated unlawful and fascist actions.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

I was gonna ask about all the missing posts, but I suppose that answers that.

Pretty sad Unfair is allowed to troll like this, and if other comments are to be believed, has been doing it for years.

I finally blocked him because I realized at this point it's irresponsible not to.

UnfairRepresent posted...

https://rb.gy/ggcbzk

I am not clicking this

I assume this has excerpt of his manifesto?
Just screenshot it and upload as image

UnfairRepresent posted...

People like him not getting the care or coverage they want, claims being declined, the blatant corruption and greed by healthcare and insurance companies. The crippling pain he was left in.

so he exclaims general discontent on healthcare right?

or does he advocate for political change?

which is it?

I already said:

WingsOfGood posted...

What political change?
even his little manifesto was basically just healthcare sucks so this guy is gonna die

Ever heard of the term going postal?
This is like saying they were politically motivated killings to change the work environment at the USPS and therefore terrorism.
No one calls them terrorism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Going_postal

Going postal is an American English slang phrase referring to becoming extremely angry or uncontrollable, often to the point of violence, and usually in a workplace environment. The expression derives from a series of incidents from 1986 onward in which United States Postal Service (USPS) workers shot and killed people in acts of mass murder. Between 1970 and 1997, more than 40 people were killed by then-current or former employees in at least 20 incidents of workplace rage. Between 1986 and 2011, workplace shootings happened roughly twice per year, with an average of 1.18 people killed per year.[1]

WingsOfGood posted...

I am not clicking this

Yeah we noticed you just ignore things you don't want to acklowedge

so he exclaims general discontent on healthcare right?

or does he advocate for political change?

Both.

which is it?

Both

Wtf.

You know what the US Healthcare system is right?

I already said:

Ever heard of the term going postal?
This is like saying they were politically motivated killings to change the work environment at the USPS and therefore terrorism.
No one calls them terrorism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Going_postal

Except it's not like saying that all. That's a complete strawman.

The equivlent would be if USPS workers commited acts of violence in an effort to force political change they couldn't through legitiamte political means.

You know, terrorism.

HashtagSEP posted...

I finally blocked him because I realized at this point it's irresponsible not to.

It's funnier to Ignore him, he still screeches and demands responses.

"I wonder why this topic has so many posts."
"Oh...okay, that's why."

UnfairRepresent posted...

Yeah we noticed you just ignore things you don't want to acklowedge

?? you want me to click some weird link, I am not ignoring it I asked you what it was and for a screenshot

UnfairRepresent posted...

Both.

so what political change does he say must be done?
write it out

saying healthcare sucks I am upset is not advocating political change it is expressing discontent

UnfairRepresent posted...

The equivlent would be if USPS workers commited acts of violence in an effort to force political change they couldn't through legitiamte political means.

they got upset due to the stressful work environment and killed a bunch of people

Luigi expressed stress and discontent for healthcare and killed someone allegedly

Not surprising. The terrorism charge did seem like theater. Glad the system still works well enough to recognize that.