Niggas getting trolled by Enter's infinite retardation and social/emotional repression.
Edit: Oh, and WTAC MOST LIKELY killed someone in a car accident while they were drunk. I know a couple people who got did for manslaughter for that. s00per bad4ss.
Last edited by constantinople; 05-08-2012 at 12:27 PM.
what the fuck is attempted manslaughter. OH no officer I didnt mean to not try to kill him. It doesnt make sense to me.
__________________
Known Snitches Zok jr & Communicate. Number one Phaggit award goes to.... [B]Schplew[/B] Congrats on being the biggest and baddest phaggit on zoklet, YOU EARNED IT!!
The difference between voluntary manslaughter and murder is that voluntary manslaughter is the result of being provoked in a way that can illicit a deadly response. Attempted manslaughter is attempting this deadly response due to the provocation and failing at it. Seems like it would be difficult to prove intent in a case like that, though. Would be easier to charge the person with felonious assault.
it's australia though, so everything is backwards.
__________________
The following users say "It is so good to hear it!":
The difference between voluntary manslaughter and murder is that voluntary manslaughter is the result of being provoked in a way that can illicit a deadly response. Attempted manslaughter is attempting this deadly response due to the provocation and failing at it. Seems like it would be difficult to prove intent in a case like that, though. Would be easier to charge the person with felonious assault.
I'm telling you, Chi didn't do anything to anyone intentionally. He hit someone with his vehicle and killed them.
Blunderstar is just ridin' dat dick.
The following users say "It is so good to hear it!":
Shit if he was OVI and did it, it's a 1st degree, or class A felony.
Good. I hope Chi will finally pull his head of his ass and drop the all the posturing. Misogyny and racism while pretending be a sociopath doesn't exactly help you resolve your "issues".
Zoklet makes me sad. A lot of people on here need a lot of help, psychologically, and I don't mean that in a derogatory way.
The following users say "It is so good to hear it!":
This post is literally technically flawless and has therefore thoroughly earned its' Thanks.
Also, please observe by amazing grammar despite being half a bottle of vodka down.
__________________
syphilis.stdx [at] gmail [dot] com
"Wow, STD has really gone off the deep end. He's like a one-man, polydrug, chronic toxicity study"
__________________ NTMF, It's a pitcure of my tesitlces.指鹿为马
The deifintion of hadrocre -"lol, bicth i've made orginial reicpe coca cloa, it ani't waitsng if yov'ue got enertily too mcuh."-Zos, aka Zombo.com
Good. I hope Chi will finally pull his head of his ass and drop the all the posturing. Misogyny and racism while pretending be a sociopath doesn't exactly help you resolve your "issues".
Zoklet makes me sad. A lot of people on here need a lot of help, psychologically, and I don't mean that in a derogatory way.
If nothing else, Chi isn't pretending. It's a pity more people won't take the chance to try and actually push past the limits of consensual morality in a real way.
Haha yeah. Didn't you just think he was an internet badass or something? I told you not to fuck with him. Or maybe that was someone else, I don't know.
The difference between voluntary manslaughter and murder is that voluntary manslaughter is the result of being provoked in a way that can illicit a deadly response. Attempted manslaughter is attempting this deadly response due to the provocation and failing at it. Seems like it would be difficult to prove intent in a case like that, though. Would be easier to charge the person with felonious assault.
WTF are you talking about you fucking moron???
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS ATTEMPTED MANSLAUGHTER. PERIOD.
the whole point of manslaughter is that its causing unintentional death. unintentional means you did not attempt to kill or if you did it was in self defense. if it was truly in self defense then you are not even guilty of manslaughter. but being the fact that its a situation, as the defender, that you didn't bring about, then the intention was never yours to begin with. you were just reacting to a situation bought onto you by the attacker. basically, if you intended and then attempted to kill someone unlawfully then you are guilty of ATTEMPTED MURDER.
that line of yours that i bolded is one of the most bizarre and biggest line of bullshit i ever read. i even for a moment thought is this another crazy batshit bit of legislation they've passed now. but even looking it up on wiki manslaughter page showed me i wasn't imagining it.
Quote:
Attempt
Main article: Attempt
In R v Creamer,[16] the court said obiter that attempted manslaughter is not an offence known to law.
The difference between voluntary manslaughter and murder is that voluntary manslaughter is the result of being provoked in a way that can illicit a deadly response. Attempted manslaughter is attempting this deadly response due to the provocation and failing at it. Seems like it would be difficult to prove intent in a case like that, though. Would be easier to charge the person with felonious assault.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unwyred
You looked this up under English law.
if you were a cop you would know american and australian law is both based on english common law. are you sure you're a pig? i mean come on, law is supposed to be your fucking business, isn't it?
__________________
'I know the voices aren't real, but man, do they ever come up with some great ideas'
If nothing else, Chi isn't pretending. It's a pity more people won't take the chance to try and actually push past the limits of consensual morality in a real way.
If nothing else, Chi isn't pretending. It's a pity more people won't take the chance to try and actually push past the limits of consensual morality in a real way.
I'm going to assume you wanted a word like cultural or consensus in place of consensual because since morality isn't a word consensual can be applied to, the word consensual makes no sense in the context.
If that is what you were trying to express, then please understand that most, certainly not all, of our morality is nearly identical, from the most remote tribes with little outside contact, to new york city and singapore. Nearly all cultures find the same activities abhorrent. there is a form of systemic morality in all primate cultures because, especially in man, the passing on of ideas is how we most rapidly evolve.
Disregarding cultural morality is one of the worst things we, as a species, could do for our survival.
Also shit about rising above morality always sounds like try hard wanna be dangerous faux sociopathy.
__________________
I'm a nutcase, but that is what I believe.
Last edited by p6867; 05-12-2012 at 08:27 AM.
The following users say "It is so good to hear it!":
please understand that most, certainly not all, of our morality is nearly identical, from the most remote tribes with little outside contact, to new york city and singapore. Nearly all cultures find the same activities abhorrent.
Where did you learn this from? I've spent months studying cultural morality, and have come to the exact opposite of what you just claimed. I won't bother you for a direct source or anything, just... why did you write that? What gave you the confidence to spread forth that drivel?
Also, just an fyi, arguing the topic of morality against Dionysus isn't a good idea.
Last edited by Blunderstar; 05-12-2012 at 08:17 AM.
Harvard professor of Biology Marc Hauser Moral Minds: How Nature Designed our Universal Sense of Right and Wrong. Gives what i think is the best evolutionary history and explanation of our morality system. If you think of human societies in strictly nucleic chemical/biologic terms, the only terms that really matter imo, any chemical group that damages the whole is eliminated.
I'm really into biology as applied chemistry.
__________________
I'm a nutcase, but that is what I believe.
Harvard professor of Biology Marc Hauser Moral Minds: How Nature Designed our Universal Sense of Right and Wrong. Gives what i think is the best evolutionary history and explanation of our morality system.
The best, you say?
Quote:
Marc Hauser, a Harvard academic who gained prominence with the publication of a book on the origin of morality, has gone on leave after an investigation by the university into problems with his research.
This book isn't that earth shattering or original. But if you want to read a book about experiments that have been repeated all over the world and be able to understand it even if you're not a science person, this is the book for you.
If you are a scientist/capable of reading and understand more straight research you should the evolution of morality by richard joyce. It's not as good of a read, but if you're going to let 2 shitty experiments he shouldn't have published turn you off hauser, go with Joyce instead.
__________________
I'm a nutcase, but that is what I believe.
Where did you learn this from? I've spent months studying cultural morality, and have come to the exact opposite of what you just claimed. I won't bother you for a direct source or anything, just... why did you write that? What gave you the confidence to spread forth that drivel?
Also, just an fyi, arguing the topic of morality against Dionysus isn't a good idea.
Holy shit snacks, 4000 year old morality that was the basis for many, many societies after it. I'm sure there's even better examples of men having the same ideas on morality, but I'll leave you to do the digging.
Last edited by constantinople; 05-12-2012 at 09:25 PM.
I'm going to assume you wanted a word like cultural or consensus in place of consensual because since morality isn't a word consensual can be applied to, the word consensual makes no sense in the context.
If that is what you were trying to express, then please understand that most, certainly not all, of our morality is nearly identical, from the most remote tribes with little outside contact, to new york city and singapore. Nearly all cultures find the same activities abhorrent. there is a form of systemic morality in all primate cultures because, especially in man, the passing on of ideas is how we most rapidly evolve.
Disregarding cultural morality is one of the worst things we, as a species, could do for our survival.
Also shit about rising above morality always sounds like try hard wanna be dangerous faux sociopathy.
That's all very nice, but it presupposes an acceptance into a cultural paragrim. I am the result of the omnipotent jizzem of nature, and you can shove your cultural relativity up your asshole.
Where did you learn this from? I've spent months studying cultural morality, and have come to the exact opposite of what you just claimed. I won't bother you for a direct source or anything, just... why did you write that? What gave you the confidence to spread forth that drivel?
Also, just an fyi, arguing the topic of morality against Dionysus isn't a good idea.
Don't fucking talk for me. I would much prefer all these hang themselves rather than trying to convert them to my mode of thinking.
That's all very nice, but it presupposes an acceptance into a cultural paragrim. I am the result of the omnipotent jizzem of nature, and you can shove your cultural relativity up your asshole.
Re: I finally made whore to a chainsaw like me!
NTMF, It's a pitcure of my tesitlces.指鹿为马
Re: I finally made whore to a chainsaw like me!
Re: I finally made whore to a chainsaw like me!
Re: I finally made whore to a chainsaw like me!
