Randomness thread, part two.

[MadMojoMonkey]

You're right. If I were going to shoot someone, I'd aim for the torso in case I wasn't accurate.

You don't mean accurate. You mean precise.

Accuracy is the location of the center of mass of your bullets on the target.

Precision is the tightness of the grouping of your bullets on the target.

Accuracy is the mean, or average. Precision is the variance or deviation from the mean.

Most conversations here are stupid.

[OngBonga]

A few days ago Mr Trump suggested that British Police were too scared to walk through certain parts of London. Using the power of science I put together the following 'scientific' diagram to show that Americans must be much more scared of their own dogs.

[OngBonga]

[a500lbgorilla]

You don't mean accurate. You mean precise.

Accuracy is the location of the center of mass of your bullets on the target.

Precision is the tightness of the grouping of your bullets on the target.

Accuracy is the mean, or average. Precision is the variance or deviation from the mean.

Amazing gif, but I really disagree. For one, words always sprawl. That's why literally has the opposite meaning these days. Two, you can be accurate to something other than dead-center-mass.

[OngBonga]

Islamic terrorism is as dangerous to Americans as falling icicles...

[a500lbgorilla]

Islamic terrorism is as dangerous to Americans as falling icicles...

Pulling from another thread.

Right, he's wrong. He's wrong about every new piece of information he brings to the table and wrong about his overall conclusions, but no one can nail him down on it because he's so good at arguing - he's so good at letting people be as stupid as the always are.

[OngBonga]

Yeah ok that last one is cheeky because it's from 2002 onwards.

But it still made me laugh.

[a500lbgorilla]

My post was aimed at Trump, btw

[JKDS]

Meh. It may be that cops are killing too many people. IDK what the right amount is.

To me, though, it's all a secondary effect of a greater judicial problem. America imprisons more Americans than any other country imprisons any other countrymen. I suspect that even this is a secondary effect of a legal system with no mandatory sunset clauses and a legacy of unfairly persecuting the least wealthy citizens.

IDK. I'm no legal expert.

It's messed up that even a person who gets a law degree still only understands one tiny corner of American Law and jurisprudence. It's absolutely scandalous that the laws are so many and complex that it is unreasonable to expect any citizen to understand them all.

Scandalous, I say.

Sunset clauses wouldn't matter. Everyone is terrified of being "soft on crime", which is why it's taking so long for reform. It's a reason more "Donald trumps" would actually be a good thing. .. at least in terms of not caring about that shit.

As far as law degrees, those don't give you expertise in any area of law. You gain that through practice alone. I agree with you that it's rediculous that someone has to spend years developing a mastery of any one particular area though.

[OngBonga]

My post was aimed at Trump, btw

lol I thought it was about rong when you first posted it.

[a500lbgorilla]

lol I thought it was about rong when you first posted it.

Yeah, I'm told I speak nonsense. I'll try to be more clear.

[wufwugy]

wtf happened to this thread

You guys have around five times our population. We have similar cultures, similar education levels, similar people. Your rates should be comparable to ours. But they're not.

we have very different cultures in many ways, and some of them are where our extra crime arises.

Shooting to kill someone who is throwing a punch is a gross overreaction.

it depends. sometimes it's the correct course of action. if you come into my home and we're alone and you try to punch me, the correct place for a bullet is your brain. the funny thing here is that the vast majority of the time, those who would have full right to shoot you, still wouldn't.

we've gotten soft and weak. we've lost our sense of honor and we've lost our sense of responsibility. it's a virus. it's so bad that nearly all of us are a part of the problem, but few will admit it.

[OngBonga]

it depends. sometimes it's the correct course of action. if you come into my home and we're alone and you try to punch me, the correct place for a bullet is your brain. the funny thing here is that the vast majority of the time, those who would have full right to shoot you, still wouldn't.

Not that I have a great deal of sympathy for people who go into people's homes and get shot, no I don't agree that the brain is where you should want the bullet to be. What the fuck is wrong with people when a human life is so worthless as to be willingly wasted just because he's in your house? No he shouldn't be there, fine shoot him. But don't actually aim for the fucking head, give the guy a chance.

[OngBonga]

Honestly, I'd rather just be burgled than kill a man.

[wufwugy]

i didnt say anything about getting burgled or about shooting somebody becasue they're in your home

[OngBonga]

huh?

if you come into my home...

[OngBonga]

So you're putting a bullet in my brain just for throwing a punch?

Fuck.

[wufwugy]

are you telling me that you read what i said and think that the reason im shooting you is becuase you're in my home and not because we're alone and you're trying to punch me, and if you're successful, i could be knocked out and i have no idea if your intention is to kill me or whatever?

[OngBonga]

are you telling me that you read what i said and think that the reason im shooting you is becuase you're in my home and not because we're alone and you're trying to punch me, and if you're successful, i could be knocked out and i have no idea if your intention is to kill me or whatever?

Well, I'm kinda role playing here in the sense I'm only in your home if I'm an intruder, in which case the fact I'm intruding is reason enough to shoot me. I mean if we're talking about me being invited, and I take a swing for you in your own home, then putting a bullet in my brain is fucking sick. I dunno how that even comes close to a reasonable reaction.

[OngBonga]

[spoonitnow]

The fact of the matter is, if I take a single punch to the head, skinny old me, I am extremely unlikely to die. If someone is threatening to punch me, I am not likely to be in fear of my life. Not unless it's a boxer.

Most of the chance of dying comes from falling and hitting your head on something. There were several examples in the link I gave above.

As an aside, I think it's interesting how people tend to take all responsibility away from the aggressor in situations like the Trayvon case (and much like what you've described in some of your responses on this).

They're normal people with families working a job every day to support them. A job that could kill them.

I tend to hate people in general, so this doesn't change things for me.

I don't see why a cop should holster his gun and have a clean fight with a random criminal who may or not be a martial arts expert / bad ass mother fucker.

+1

We're not a million miles apart.

Dan, I'm not suggesting fisticuffs. I'm simply saying that when an unarmed person is shot, it should not be with the intention to kill, unless it is reasonable he poses a serious threat even if shot.

You're absolutely correct in this. When an unarmed person is shot, it's to stop the threat. These are not the same things in theory or practice.

Well the problem here is an armed population, because very very rarely does a cop get shot in the UK.

That doesn't make an armed population a problem. It actually indicates the opposite.

Plus when you shoot, you aim for the torso. Always. You ain't gonna pinpoint target his shoulder to avoid serious injury. Further away from the centre equals closer to missing and hitting something or someone else.

The voice of reason once again...

Well this is once again down to training.

You're right. If I were going to shoot someone, I'd aim for the torso in case I wasn't accurate.

If I were a highly trained armed cop, I'd aim for the shoulder.

...which just went out the window again.

Let me put it this way so that there's [hopefully] no confusion: No amount of training makes this a good idea.

Most conversations here are stupid. And there's people here arguing that shooting to kill is exactly what they should do.

Not a single person has argued that.

I know the intention is to mock spoon, but actually it accidentally compliments him. I mean if I feel so great about beating him at chess, I must think he's a smart guy.

I resigned a won endgame in my first tournament game against a master when I was ~1450 or so, so there's that. I'd just come off of a win against a ~1950, who was the highest-rated person I'd ever beaten in tournament play at that point. /random

Not that I have a great deal of sympathy for people who go into people's homes and get shot, no I don't agree that the brain is where you should want the bullet to be. What the fuck is wrong with people when a human life is so worthless as to be willingly wasted just because he's in your house? No he shouldn't be there, fine shoot him. But don't actually aim for the fucking head, give the guy a chance.

What the fuck is wrong with people when their own life is so worthless as to be willingly wasted just by punching someone in the face? This is where the responsibility wufwugy was talking about comes into play.

[JKDS]

Some of this is just poor story telling.

Wuf didn't initially say "punched in the face". Still, what punch means can be relative. If I punch you in the shoulder, it's rediculous that you'd shoot me over it. That's just what guys do, and if you were so harmed by such a gesture...just sue or call the cops or whatever. Never shooting. Legally, you shouldn't shoot in this situation either.

But punched in the face, that can be very different. It matters a ton what the intent here is...and I don't mean intent like...wanting to hit. I mean was this a punch intended to cause harm? Did he put his weight behind it? You don't need to be all sciency, anyone who's been in a fight knows what a real punch looks like. In those circumstances, ya, shooting is probably reasonable.

Agree that in the arm/leg/shoulder, even head are just impracticle. Maybe even impossible. It's hard to hit a bullseye, and even harder when it's moving.

[JKDS]

When did we become so afraid of everybody though? I walked to and from school alone when I was as young as 7. Now kids aren't even allowed to play outside. This fear of others and always assuming the worst isn't good for us.

[OngBonga]

Not a single person has argued that.

I thought you did, amd mojo certainly did.

If someone is throwing punches at a police officer, then that officer has every reason to believe that their life is being threatened. If brandishing their weapon doesn't immediately end the assault, then shooting to kill out of self preservation is exactly what should happen.

I'm saying shoot to disable, and if you kill, well you tried to be reasonable.

Most of the chance of dying comes from falling and hitting your head on something. There were several examples in the link I gave above.

But this can happen chasing a criminal. Is a cop justified in shooting someone who committed a misdemeanor, who is running away, on the basis that chasing him risks his life?

The probability of dying when punched, whether due to being hit sweetly, or falling and banging your head, is extremely low. I know it happens, my ex witnessed this happen in a street fight in my town a few years back and had to call the cops. But people get punched in the head all the time, noone expects it to result in death.

As an aside, I think it's interesting how people tend to take all responsibility away from the aggressor in situations like the Trayvon case (and much like what you've described in some of your responses on this).

That's because cops are supposed to act responsibly. Where that's the case, all sympathy for the aggressor evaporates.

That doesn't make an armed population a problem. It actually indicates the opposite.

It does. If the population is armed, then the police have to be too. There's no way around that. And when all cops are armed, then it means training them to elite status is impractical.

We're not an armed nation, and cops rarely die on duty. As a result, cops rarely feel the need to shoot. So an unarmed population is not making the problem worse. If that were true, our figures would make worse reading than yours.

Let me put it this way so that there's [hopefully] no confusion: No amount of training makes this a good idea.

Yeah I realise I'm way off base here. I'm not trained in gun handling, which is exactly why I'm naive about it.

What the fuck is wrong with people when their own life is so worthless as to be willingly wasted just by punching someone in the face? This is where the responsibility wufwugy was talking about comes into play.

But fights happen all the time, often for good reason, and often it is necessary to resolve issues. My problem here is, if it's ok to shoot someone in the head for punching you, then fights are gonna get out of hand really fucking quickly, with little legal consequences for those who decide to "protect" themselves by wasting a human being.

If I go to punch someone in the head, I'm really not expecting it to result in me getting shot. Not unless I try punching a badass gangsta, anyway.

I resigned a won endgame in my first tournament game against a master when I was ~1450 or so, so there's that. I'd just come off of a win against a ~1950, who was the highest-rated person I'd ever beaten in tournament play at that point. /random

I've only ever once beaten a 2000+ player. My rating got above 1900 on gameknot in long games, I'm currently under 1500 in 10min blitz games on chess.com though. I dunno how accurate these rating are in relation to ELO.

[wufwugy]

When did we become so afraid of everybody though? I walked to and from school alone when I was as young as 7. Now kids aren't even allowed to play outside. This fear of others and always assuming the worst isn't good for us.

when did we become so afraid of each other? i think when we started changing the narrative from responsibility to victimhood. and when we focused only on the idea that aggressors are victims themselves and that the only people truly responsible for solving problems are official authorities.

the safer places to be are the places where people take responsibility for their own situations. you're much more likely to get shot in one of the many inner city victimhood capitals of the world than at a rural montanan's ranch.

[MadMojoMonkey]

If you're over the age of 18 and you pretend to be unaware that physical violence causes deaths, then you're practicing willful ignorance, and that is your choice. Demanding that your choice somehow alters reality is not gonna work.

I only advocate lethal force in self-preservation. I firmly stand opposed to using a lethal weapon to a non-lethal intent. Find a better tool for the job. That's not what guns are for.

[rong]

Thinking more about levels of death by cop and cop risk.

You could probably build a model off existing data for each type of cop interaction and make level of crime a function of say cop death per 1000 interactions.

The reason I find this interesting is that you can bet your ass that models exist with level of crime as a function of spending, number of police and all other manor of variables.

You also hear (I think ) of police talking about ways of minimising risk to cops which in itself must be how they come up with their standard procedures for most common scenarios. And I'm sure you could easily build a model, in fact many probably exist, for risk to cops as a function of spending, training and lots of other variables.

I just wonder if anybody ever put the two together and aggregated the information for all categories of interaction to come up with a model whereby for a given set of resources you can measure crime rate as a function of cop death.

It might be distasteful, but it seems relevant. Because once the resource levels have been chosen and allocated, the training schemes chosen and implemented, the public broadcasts carried out, the equipment picked, the sentences for particular crimes decided, all that's left is procedures and decisions of cop on the scene. And it would seem that the decisions that cop takes and the procedures he must follow have a direct causal link with chance of death and the level of crime stopped or accepted.

[spoonitnow]

I responded to JKDS's and wufwugy's comments in the Rich White Men Rule the World thread here: http://www.flopturnriver.com/pokerfo...30#post2256430

[a500lbgorilla]

Thinking more about levels of death by cop and cop risk.

You could probably build a model off existing data for each type of cop interaction and make level of crime a function of say cop death per 1000 interactions.

The reason I find this interesting is that you can bet your ass that models exist with level of crime as a function of spending, number of police and all other manor of variables.

You also hear (I think ) of police talking about ways of minimising risk to cops which in itself must be how they come up with their standard procedures for most common scenarios. And I'm sure you could easily build a model, in fact many probably exist, for risk to cops as a function of spending, training and lots of other variables.

I just wonder if anybody ever put the two together and aggregated the information for all categories of interaction to come up with a model whereby for a given set of resources you can measure crime rate as a function of cop death.

It might be distasteful, but it seems relevant. Because once the resource levels have been chosen and allocated, the training schemes chosen and implemented, the public broadcasts carried out, the equipment picked, the sentences for particular crimes decided, all that's left is procedures and decisions of cop on the scene. And it would seem that the decisions that cop takes and the procedures he must follow have a direct causal link with chance of death and the level of crime stopped or accepted.

It all reminds me of how to make stone soup.

First you declare that you'll make stone soup, then when anyone asks how you make it, you say, "First, I'll need a fire." And wait for it to be provided. "Next, I'll need a cauldron and clean water."

"Now, I'll need fresh vegetables, some bacon, fish, and assorted meats..." and so it goes on.

In related news, http://www.techinsider.io/elon-musk-...ompany-2015-12

[wufwugy]

i wish it was socially acceptable to say faggot and nigger. actually nigga sounds better, nigger is just kinda dumb. those words are so unique and taboo that they have great value when used as a form of subversion.

sometimes i call my closest of close white friends nigga, but that's about it.

[a500lbgorilla]

It's socially acceptable in some places. Maybe check out the KKK?

Just enjoy the challenge of dropping those bombs and surviving intact because you live in a world and day where people run cold to the sound of them.

[wufwugy]

ive a theory that societies that oppress women emerge from the pervaded moral that masturbation is wrong.

i mean, think about it. if for whatever reason, dudes didn't masturbate or felt really really bad when they did, even the most collected of individual would be sexually aggressive towards women. which would evolve into a convention of ownership of women in order to protect them and bed down the aggression

[a500lbgorilla]

What about the dudes that didn't need to masturbate because the ladies like 'em?

[wufwugy]

they still masturbate. plus it's a tiny minority.

[a500lbgorilla]

And I do hope at least someone is going to check out Fog of War with Robert McNamara. Clever, honest, old dudes that have lived a life in the halls of power and give candid interviews should be paid attention to.

[wufwugy]

shit nigga i saw that a decade ago

[a500lbgorilla]

Torrent nothing, mothernuggas



edit do torrent it. Previous link is a bust. Here's one scene of the docu.

[a500lbgorilla]

How'd your finals go, wuf?

[wufwugy]

next week. dead week was a disaster because people suck

[a500lbgorilla]

Dead week?

[wufwugy]

the week before finals when no new material is assigned

[a500lbgorilla]

Oh I gotcha. I remember having terrible stress pains in my gut after one run of finals. Nothing like teaching yourself the material over and over so much that you can see the book pages in your mind while you're taking the test.

Good luck, you poor bastard.

[OngBonga]

I masturbated more when I had a girlfriend. Now it's just once a day.

[OngBonga]

The way to beat racist or homophobic terminology is to change its definition.

Nigger - a man of high intelligence.
Faggot - a man with a larger than average penis.

Bigots will need to find new words, then we just redefine them.

I'm a genius.

[JKDS]

It's dumb that words are banned, but there are so many funner and more insulting things to call people.

[spoonitnow]

ive a theory that societies that oppress women emerge from the pervaded moral that masturbation is wrong.

i mean, think about it. if for whatever reason, dudes didn't masturbate or felt really really bad when they did, even the most collected of individual would be sexually aggressive towards women. which would evolve into a convention of ownership of women in order to protect them and bed down the aggression

Feminism is the systematic oppression of women, and it only emerges from fat, ugly women who can't get laid getting pissed off at women who can and the men who don't want to fuck them (aka all men).

[wufwugy]

im talking islamic level oppression of women, not feminist level

[a500lbgorilla]

El Nino winter is the best. It's still almost 70 degrees out with the sun down.

[spoonitnow]

im talking islamic level oppression of women, not feminist level

Here's some oppression of women:

Paris stabbing: Hooded Isis-supporter shouting 'It is for Daesh' stabs nursery school teacher in the throat

A hooded man shouting allegiance to Isis has stabbed a nursery school teacher in the throat in his Paris classroom.

The attack, which happened a month and a day after the jihadist massacres in France, took place before children arrived at a state nursery school in Aubervilliers, just north of the Paris city boundary.

Police, who are treating the incident as a terrorist attack, said that the teacher had been stabbed in the throat and stomach by scissors and a box-cutter. He was taken to hospital but his life is not in danger.

LOL LET'S BAN BOX CUTTERS

Daech is the Arabic acronym for Islamic State. The jihadist group has been warning on social media that French schools might be the next target after the shootings and suicide bombings in the Paris area on 13 November in which 130 people were murdered.

#religionofpeace

The unknown attacker reportedly armed himself with weapons he found in the classroom. He is understood to have been hooded, masked and wearing gloves.

He is currently on the run, reportedly armed with the box cutter and a pair of scissors.

Paris police fail to protect the public yet again.

[MadMojoMonkey]

I see plenty of reason to label those individuals as criminals, but I'm not seeing your case for the other couple of billion people you want to hold accountable.

[spoonitnow]

I see plenty of reason to label those individuals as criminals, but I'm not seeing your case for the other couple of billion people you want to hold accountable.

I didn't know there were a couple of billion members of ISIS.

[rong]

Ahem. ..

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-35093799

Cliffs: teacher made it up.

[MadMojoMonkey]

I didn't know there were a couple of billion members of ISIS.

Really? #religionofpeace

My bad.

[wufwugy]

they dont call themselves daesh

[OngBonga]

they dont call themselves daesh

That's exactly what I thought when this first broke. I knew something was fishy about this based on that alone. I'm glad my paranoia isn't totally unfounded.

[spoonitnow]

"Faked"

[OngBonga]

This year I will be celebrating Davemas.

[spoonitnow]

Finland faces wave of vigilante mobs targeting migrants as arrest of an Afghan asylum seeker for rape of 14-year-old schoolgirl pushes one town to the brink

In the town of Kempele, tension between locals and asylum seekers is rising after a 14-year-old girl was raped. Happened fortnight after youth migrant centre opened in town to mass opposition and 17-year-old refugee charged.

Across Finland similar cases have sparked panic, with human chains blocking refugees at the country's borders. Even some MPs are demanding asylum seekers leave country and put an end to 'nightmare called multiculturalism'.

This gon be good.

[wufwugy]

calling multiculturalism the problem is throwing the baby out with the bath water.

the problem is rape and dissimilation into standard mores.

[OngBonga]

The problem is people not called spoon.

I guarantee that the rapist was not called spoon.

Ban everyone not called spoon.

[spoonitnow]

The problem is people not called spoon.

I guarantee that the rapist was not called spoon.

Ban everyone not called spoon.

Finally, someone who speaks some sense.

In all seriousness, multiculturalism means something different over there because of all of the harping on it as a justification for systematically bringing in thousands of "refugees," many of which are really just welfare-seekers pretending to be from Syria.

[OngBonga]

No question we have a soft welfare system for immigrants, and it needs to be tightened. But not at the cost of our obligations to take in refugess.

Multiculturism means something different here because it works better here than it does in USA. It's far from perfect, but that's the fault of government, not immigrants. We don't encourage cultural integration strongly enough. Everyone who lives in this country should either speak English, or be learning to. Incoming immigrants must at least intend to work, at least until they're citizens. I know I'm a lazy shit but I wouldn't dream of going to another country to live off their benefit system. But that's most immigrants anyway. I don't see many of them at the jobcentre, they're making curries, selling ciggies, driving taxis.

As far as I'm concerned, if someone lives in a wartorn hellhole, especially one that we're involved in, and they want to come to the UK to better their life, well so long as they learn the language, work, and don't break the law (well, the ones that aren't stupid, anyway), then I welcome them.

[spoonitnow]

No question we have a soft welfare system for immigrants, and it needs to be tightened. But not at the cost of our obligations to take in refugees.

First off, there is no obligation to take in refugees.

Second, if there was an obligation, then it would come second to the safety of the people who are already in the country.

Third, if there was an obligation and it didn't come second to the safety of the people who are already in the country, then they still should not make it so simple to fake being a refugee to get into the country and get free shit.

[OngBonga]

Second and third points, I agree.

But I do think we have an obligation, because our foreign policy is an important factor at play here.

[spoonitnow]

Second and third points, I agree.

But I do think we have an obligation, because our foreign policy is an important factor at play here.

That's fair enough. I would contend that there are other ways to help these people than to bring them inside of our (or your) borders unchecked.

[wufwugy]

That's fair enough. I would contend that there are other ways to help these people than to bring them inside of our (or your) borders unchecked.

there are much better ways. people wanted in capitalist countries before welfare became a thing, so we'll put that aside. the reason people flock to our countries is because their countries are shitholes. their countries are shitholes because of their domestic policies.

there is an irony about the modern left in how it has such great empathy for the plight of the downtrodden, yet it rejects the solutions to resolve the plight. it tweets its disdain for capitalist principles from its iphone that it got from utility of capitalist principles. it laments any attempt to tear down the wall that is oppressing the people it claims to care deeply for, calling it corporate greed and military adventurism.

life sucks for so many people because their governments and civil organizing principles are garbage. the problem is fixable, but the solution is often unpalatable because people don't understand it on a conceptual level, despite the fact that they engage it on a physical and social level.

[OngBonga]

That's fair enough. I would contend that there are other ways to help these people than to bring them inside of our (or your) borders unchecked.

Yeah, the key word being "unchecked". that's where we have common ground. I'm certainly not advocating an open door policy for refugees. We agree to accept a fair and manageable amount per year, and we vet those who apply. Every nation who accepts refugees should do likewise. Sure, now and then someone slips through the net. I hate to say it, but that's the price we pay for our foreign policy. So long as our governments our doing their best, and our doing the right thing. The truth, of course, is they are doing neither.

[spoonitnow]

Yeah, the key word being "unchecked". that's where we have common ground. I'm certainly not advocating an open door policy for refugees. We agree to accept a fair and manageable amount per year, and we vet those who apply. Every nation who accepts refugees should do likewise. Sure, now and then someone slips through the net. I hate to say it, but that's the price we pay for our foreign policy. So long as our governments our doing their best, and our doing the right thing. The truth, of course, is they are doing neither.

The problem I have is when anyone who calls themselves a refugee from a certain area is brought in with little or no screening, and that's something that's happening on an enormous level in a number of European countries. A fake Syrian passport costs less than $500 in many areas, and journalists have went through the process of getting one just to show how easy it is. With that passport, anyone who is brown can get into a handful of countries that are seeing the biggest problems right now (like Sweden, for example).

[rong]

http://www.news.com.au/world/europe/...4908091b24545e

No sir, not rape, I fell and accidentally penetrated her. Aaaand gets acquitted.

[a500lbgorilla]

And my playbook gets a new page.

[JKDS]

http://www.news.com.au/world/europe/...4908091b24545e

No sir, not rape, I fell and accidentally penetrated her. Aaaand gets acquitted.

I did a quick search, hoping to find a source discussing the trial, or what was presented, of whether the victim testified, or whatever. Came up short. I hate that so much, because this is a cool story. Sad, but cool. What'd the attorney do? Was the argument really "clumsyness", or was there a strong theme of personal responsibility? Was this a reasonable doubt thing (is that a thing in the uk?)...or was this guy just suave as fuck.

I wanna know, because it's neat.

[JKDS]

Instead, I just get a bunch of parrots. God forbid a news company do their own damn research

[spoonitnow]

I mentioned the case earlier in this thread with a description of what happened. His story changed more than once, but I'm pretty sure he shouldn't have been convicted in the situation.

[JKDS]

Why do you say that? All I've heard is that she woke up with him inside her. Shouldn't that be punishable? Or are you going from a legal defenses point of view?

[spoonitnow]

I meant in terms of legal defense. Her story wasn't exactly strong either.

Edit: I want to clarify what I mean by her story not being all that strong. The girl started off by inviting him to come back to her apartment with her and her friend (who he already knew). Then they decided to go to his flat *after they had already left*. Once he got there, he intentionally had the girls pour their own drinks. The arrangement of the furniture in the flat also doesn't support her claims. There are a ton of holes in her story that would make it impossible to successfully charge the guy.