misteraven

Zombie Airman: Infected World Book 1 Not the absolute best zombie book I've ever read, but so far, so good.

Dope.

Was just talking to my son yesterday about trying to get out a bunch when the weather is decent. Really need to find time to get out from behind a computer.

this real?

🤢

Wondering how you made the conclusion that I believe the system works? Far from it and have said a few things about how its a broken system. Last comment even mentioned actually auditing every law on the books. People are not equal. Thats why socialiam / communism doesnt work. We're individuals with different abilities and ambitions. Likewise we're afforded different skills, knowledge, privilege and trust depending on many things, not limited to profession. People are created equal, but do different things with what they are given. For most of it, indeed, they should be judged equal. However, taking advantage of privileged position / trust should add to the consequence of the crime, in addition to the consequence for the crime itself.

I've clArified that a couple times that I'm not saying all crimes across the board due to position, only that a person given responsibility due to profession that abuses it, is more culpable in a good many cases. But addressing your statement, yes. Lets say a cop arrests a woman at a bar because she's being belligerent and is obviously drunk. En route to the station, he goes out of his way to find an industrial zone and rapes her. I see this as much more culpable than a pizza guy doing a delivery that happens on a hot girl on a delivery and rapes her. Both are obvious crimes, but the cop abused a privileged position that has a clear expectation of trust whereas pizza guy is a scum bag that did something horrible. You're exempting the mentally disabled (and in a previous comment, also children) from crimes because they are less culpable. In this case, it's an expected limitation due to the cognitive ability and the maturity that allows for self control. It's not a large step to also say that certain professions naturally lend to increased advantages as well. That a cop that has someone in custody is not only expected to have a much more dialed in understanding of what is legal and not legal, as well as the consequences of the actions around all that, but they also operate within a privileged position of specific types of trust. There's an inherent expectation applied to specific position by society, as well as a clear logic that a professional is able to conduct themselves and execute specific tasks better than the rest of us. More so than that, some positions also require a certain level of trust as part of the job. An individual that gets drunk on a lunch break at work, but only operates a keyboard is not the same as an individual that gets drunk at work who's job includes being responsible for other lives (lets say a tower crane operator on a big project). Even if ultimately they end up doing the same crime, there's an inherent expectation by construction workers that they can trust the various moving parts on site so that they can focus on their jobs. Same with the pizza delivery versus cop rape scenario. And indeed, I believe an extensive audit of laws is well past due and that most should be thrown out and the rest overhauled and simplified. Every law should be considered from the POV that they are ultimately enforced through violence. But the laws we as a society agree to should be enforced consistently. Likewise, we should regularly review the laws we have and their implementation and ensure they are necessary. There should also be a legal recourse that isn't necessarily contingent on deep pockets. I agree, but this is a different conversation and not mutually exclusive to the conversation we're having in regards to personal accountability and the differences between them based upon professional ability and associated privilege / trust.

You’re getting disingenuous with your rebuttal. A caste system is a social hierarchy you’re born into. What I’m saying is that people that abuse privilege should be held to a higher degree of culpability because, well... They’re more culpable. I gave several examples that I believe are logical consistencies, and how not treating it as such in this case is actually inconsistent. Clearly you’re a follower of Ancap. I don’t subscribe to any single philosophy because I don’t believe any single one can be entirely perfect. Perhaps ancap makes tremendously more sense than most others, but same way we can be critical of Democrats and Republicans of subscribing to party ideology and then blindly following along because it fits party belief, I’d say the same about not questing the individual tenet of all ideologies including ancap. Doest matter to me if they’re right 99.9% of the time, because it means there is occasion when it’s wrong. In this case, IMO, that ideology is wrong if you’re saying it inherently treats all people exactly the same, when I’ve laid A logical argument for how circumstances and context are not all equal. And indeed, fixing this one area doesn’t magically make a largely broken system suddenly work. Lots of other areas need overhaul as well. How realistic it is to implement is another discussion and applies as much, if not more so, to replacing what we have with an Ancap system nation wide.

HRC was exonerated by the FBI because her crime wasn’t intentional. Try pointing to that case / judgement the next time you’re standing in front of a judge.

Because they’re rarely enforced and judgement is administered accordingly.

Nope. I specifically mentioned that a core part of this is abusing a position of privilege. An adult fondling a child is an abuse of power. An adult fondling another adult is different. A person that uses a privileged position to facilitate a crime is more culpable. Therefore the consequence should be greater.

Whole system is fucked and not saying my idea solves all of it. Merely saying that people are not equal. They hold different skills, positions, ambitions etc. You’ve acknowledged differences in culpability, though it’s easy when it’s that extreme. My position is that people have various privileges and access based upon their profession and as such, the crimes differ. The culpability differs and therefore so should the accountability. Sharia law and all that is an entirely different conversation. Much like discrepancies in gun violence between countries, there’s cultural differences at play that have implications trust in my mind make it a very difficult, if not irrelevant, comparison to make.

The two adults in our scenario here have different levels of capability. More important is they also have different levels of trust and privilege as well.

Would seem that by your line of thinking that you think children should be treated the same as adults if convicted of the same crime? They’re both humans and therefore equal under that line of thought. My line of thinking allows for the idea that people can be culpable to varying degrees. I would expect different behavior from an adult than a child and would obviously hold one to different account than the other. Same idea applies.

Also, I don’t dispute that cops are just as human as the rest of us. But there is the implication that because they are professionals at a given task, and should be trained accordingly, that they should be better capable at those tasks. Coupled with certain trust that’s afforded in the execution of those tasks, should also come with greater responsibility and therefore greater consequence as well.

Doesn’t change my mind. If you’re in a professional position that is centered on on a specific type of trust, it should be held to a higher standard. As such, violations of it should be held to higher consequence. Again, a surgeon that rapes a patient while they’re knocked out for a procedure is not the same as some dude that snatches a chick off a dark street and rapes her. Both are evil scumbags, but the doctor is presumed to be trustworthy. You subjected yourself to him with a very real notion of trust and he violated it. I see it as somewhat analogous to premeditated homicide versus accidental homicide. End result might be the same to the victim and their friends / family, but the former rightfully justifies a stiffer consequence.

The maximum penalty established for that level of crime + 100%. No exceptions, no loop holes. Anyone that might choose to not pursue a career path cause they don’t like the consequences if they were to abuse the power that comes with that job, sounds like exactly what you’d want. Precisely the way to filter applicants / candidates to high trust jobs. Might be willing to go 1000% when it comes to legislators and drain the swamp for real.

Totally disagree. They should be held to a higher standard. They're placed in privileged positions that are easily taken advantage of. As such, they're also more likely to get away with it in addition to being paid to not only enforce laws, but serve as pillars to the community as a whole. Anyone that violates law, while maintaining a privileged position that directly relates to the laws being violated should be held to greater scrutiny and consequence. Example: A surgeon raping a patient while under anesthesia for a procedure is not the same as a woman being raped by a stranger that snatched her walking by an alley. Both are horrible, but one is vastly different than the other. There's a matter of trust that sits at the heart of one versus the other.

Damn, you kinda ruined it now.

She looks like a nice girl and definitely pretty despite the small stature. Not even sure how anyone would pass up a smash. I'd probably have dated her in my younger years if her personality and looks are as strong as I'm imagining here. Biggest issue is that everyone else that sees you walking around with her are thinking, 'pocket pussy, LOL!'.

She's got long legs, but clearly this is massive amounts of lens distortion.

Damn, have a bunch of videos to catch up on LOL

Probably about $90 so far.

Not quite. We shutdown the pedo thread. This one tends to skew well above legal.

Jesus