Captain.Heroin
Bluelight Crew
If you think going into the military is the only way to learn how to use a gun you're also shit out of luck.
The 2019 Trump Presidency Thread
- Thread starter JessFR
- Start date
- Status
JessFR
Bluelight Crew
Yes, although it is true that the military will teach you tactics and give you training that will make groups of people far more dangerous when operating together.
Also a trained person with a gun is far more lethal than an untrained person with a gun. I mean, obviously dead is dead, there's no more or less dead than dead. But someone with training is going to be able to effectively kill a lot more people with a rifle than someone without.
Not saying the military is the only option, but it's a pretty sensible one if you're hoping to form a paramilitary terrorist group.
They will also teach you survival and evasion skills that can be useful if you're interested in a career as a paramilitary terrorist. Add in that they'll pay you to teach you all that, that's quite a bargain.
Certainly a better decision than refusing to use cryptographic technology that children can master because it's "too complicated".
Last edited:
Captain.Heroin
Bluelight Crew
The whole article about it makes him seem delusional and I'm sure even if he is he won't get not-guilty. They're going to keep him in prison forever.
Xorkoth
Bluelight Crew
I like the BBC more than any other mainstream news source, or really, any other that I have seen. That should make you feel nice because I know how proud of your country you are. I will agree that mainstream American news sources, for the most part, have an agenda one way or another, trying to push something, reporting irresponsibly, sensationalism, all that bunch of camel shit. CNN does and Fox does and so do the rest of them. Not that there isn't true information conveyed sometimes, but it's hard to trust. The Internet exposure to "news" is way sketchier even. It's not a good situation.
Okay it's time to get back to Trump for sure. If Trump and I were in a room, I would so have my back turned to him right now, and you know what, I'd stay that way for the duration of this thread.
Ganjcat
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2013
- Messages
- 4,881
I am not proud of bbc and do not feel any cultural connection to it do you watch bbc? or any news much
JessFR
Bluelight Crew
You're correct. To be found not guilt by reason of insanity, you pretty much have to be unable to appreciate that society deems your actions to be wrong. Simply being delusional isn't enough if you still would have been aware that you were committing murder in the eyes of the law.
Not that it much matters. Being found not guilty by reason of insanity is just trading probably life in prison for probably life in a mental hostal. Where it really helps is if they're gonna execute you if you're found guilty.
I mean obviously a jury can always nullify for whatever reason they like. But legally it shouldn't make a difference.
Captain.Heroin
Bluelight Crew
Yeah I figure the DA/state just bribes the doctors to say "oh he's craaaaazy" and then it's the person's attorneys dredging up their own mental health people in court... while you are being force-fed psychotic-inducing drugs...and what not.
I'm afraid of what answer I might get but.... what do you feel... culturally... connected... to?
Xorkoth
Bluelight Crew
Yes I watch BBC anyway, as I made evident when I mentioned that I like BBC. I'm guessing you think it's fake news because it has a liberal slant, but they do a good job usually of being objective and I feel the quality of the reporting is higher as well as the integrity of it. In fact I also sometimes watch other news sources. I don't soend a lot of time on the news, I learn more about what's going on posting in here. But yeah I watch (or mostly listen on the radio actually) to BBC fairly regularly.
JessFR
Bluelight Crew
Generally it's not gonna be in the prosecutions interest to argue that a defendants crazy. You want the jury to believe the defendants as directly responsible for their actions as possible. It only takes one jury member who sympathizes with the mentally ill to destroy a case.
But it is true that some experts disproportionately come down on one side again and again. You probably don't have to bribe them since you can find experts with their own prejudices anyway.
The danger there though is the defense can ask the expert how many times they've advocated in favor of one side or another. And that can destroy credibility.
Ganjcat
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2013
- Messages
- 4,881
no i dont think its fake cameras dont lie i like to watch now and again to see what the big stories are but the problem is its always the same news with brexit and trump so i mostly dont watch it because its to repetitive
Captain.Heroin
Bluelight Crew
Gotcha Jess. Thank you for enlightening me and yes I realized this, but figured DA would just change his tune after verdict to get the outcome he wants, not what the justice system determined, and so forth. Could be wrong here.
Xorkoth
Bluelight Crew
I really need to go to bed but damn CEP keeps drawing me in for "just one more" 
I'm gonna be dead on my feet tomorrow.
I'm gonna be dead on my feet tomorrow.
JessFR
Bluelight Crew
Not sure I follow what you're suggesting. Could you rephrase? I know it probably doesn't matter that much and we're a little off topic, I'm just curious what you're suggesting.
I really need to go to bed but damn CEP keeps drawing me in for "just one more"
Just one more post...all the cool kids are doing it. :D
Captain.Heroin
Bluelight Crew
Like if I was a District Attorney, and I wanted a guy in prison, and then the jury goes "not guilty by reason of..." then I just bribe the doctor to keep signing off on "crazy do not release" form, right?
I'm quite exhausted and probably won't understand anything I'm posting in the morning anyways.
I'm quite exhausted and probably won't understand anything I'm posting in the morning anyways.
JessFR
Bluelight Crew
Ah, all good. I suppose it's theoretically possible, but it seems pretty unlikely. I mean, nobodies been caught doing that to my knowledge. And I doubt the same doctor would be in charge for the rest of the life of the prisoner. And if they got caught, you'd get disbarred for doing that and probably charged.
It's kinda like suggesting a scenario where a prosecutor doesn't like that someone didn't get a death sentence, so they secretly kill them. I mean sure, I suppose it's possible. But there's a lot of problems with the idea and it would be more the case of one lone nut job of a prosecutor than institutionalized corruption.
Now, there absolutely is corruption in the justice system. Less IMO than a lot of people think there is, but there is definitely some. But it's much more likely to come in the form of a prosecutor trying to bury evidence in the discovery phase. Or similar violations of professional ethics that would get them disbarred were it uncovered.
This is one of the reasons I'm against DAs being elected. I think it creates too much political conflict of interest. But though it may have its own problems, I still consider the judicial branch to be the least corrupt of the three.
Captain.Heroin
Bluelight Crew
Primarily because any potential victims would be drugged on antipsychotics until death and "they're just crazy" is what will remain in the minds of others. Right? Think about it.
That doesn't mean people have to be doing it. I'm just saying. I've probably seen too much Law & Order. ?
True but think about how many doctors take bribes or the kickbacks from pharmaceutical companies. Sure that's less muddy, I suppose. You have a point.
WAIT THIS WAS a Law and Order episode... it's coming back to me. L&O SVU... Teens sent by a judge... yep. Dick Wolf loosely wrote about this.
I don't think it was the DA doing it, it was the judge. If the DA was in on it, there would be no end in sight.
JessFR
Bluelight Crew
The other thing is that, this isn't your usual professional corruption. I mean there are professional ethics rules for lawyers that go beyond just their behavior on the job. But anyone can try and bribe a doctor. The victims family could try. You and I could try. You wouldn't have to be a prosecutor.
Speaking of corruption and law and order, that's something I always found amusing and disturbing about that show. So many of the characters are completely corrupt and yet we're seemingly supposed to root for them. Lol. I've noticed a couple episodes which have had what I've taken to be a bad ending only to think to myself.. "why is the sad dramatic music playing? This is the good ending! The system worked and stopped the corrupt behavior of the protagonists!"
Yeah we're definitely off topic now. But damnit trump will still be here tomorrow!
Speaking of corruption and law and order, that's something I always found amusing and disturbing about that show. So many of the characters are completely corrupt and yet we're seemingly supposed to root for them. Lol. I've noticed a couple episodes which have had what I've taken to be a bad ending only to think to myself.. "why is the sad dramatic music playing? This is the good ending! The system worked and stopped the corrupt behavior of the protagonists!"
Yeah we're definitely off topic now. But damnit trump will still be here tomorrow!
Captain.Heroin
Bluelight Crew
I always wondered why Dick Wolf didn't write an episode where POTUS get accused of pussy grabbing. Probably because Dick Wolf's net worth is somewhere in the ballpark of $250 million, probably half of what Trump owns, divided by a lot less heads. Believe it or not Wolf might have voted for Trump the more I think about it.
- Status