HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Other Sports > General Sports
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
General Sports Other sports without their own forum, and general sports talk

Sad news out of South Africa (Oct. 2014 upd: 5-year jail sentence)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-21-2013, 04:26 PM
  #76
SpinTheBlackCircle
Global Moderator
boots and pants
 
SpinTheBlackCircle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 34,449
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Faidh ar Rud Eigin View Post
Still, given what transpired in the bail hearing, it's very likely that the charge will be dropped down to something like manslaughter, if not dropped entirely. Their case fell apart. They have no motive, their witness couldn't possibly hear anything going on in that house, they made mistakes while investigating, just to name a few.

Only thing I could see them getting him on is the weapons charges (Apparently he wasn't allowed to own the ammunition he had, despite being allowed to own the submachine gun he had laying against the wall).
if he shot through a door unannounced, that's a crime in South Africa. It's not premeditated murder but it's still punishable by jail time

__________________
Devil inside, devil inside, every single one of us, the devil inside.
SpinTheBlackCircle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2013, 04:42 PM
  #77
Faidh ar Rud Eigin
Modhnóirí Claonta
 
Faidh ar Rud Eigin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Transcendent
Country: Isle of Man
Posts: 16,681
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by J17 Vs Proclamation View Post
He killed a women by being an absolute moron. If he doesn't recieve prison time .... then i don't even know .....
It's not the first time this has happened. You're acting like he's a paranoid madman. It's a tragic incident but with how common crime is over there its justified to be suspicious of noises in your house. He should have checked first but you're making it sound like he has no reason to believe something like that could happen.

People get suspended sentences or probation for manslaughter which is worse than this if this is an accident. You simply don't put people in jail for the hell or it (And given Pistorius is disabled it would cost extra money to house him). He'll suffer psychologically for this, jail time isn't necessary.

Faidh ar Rud Eigin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2013, 05:09 PM
  #78
darko
Registered User
 
darko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Country: Australia
Posts: 32,703
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncle Rotter View Post
It's not the actual trial, it's just to determine whether he gets bail

SA jails are notoriously dangerous. Overcrowded and dangerous.

darko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2013, 05:29 PM
  #79
DaaaaB's
Registered User
 
DaaaaB's's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Faidh ar Rud Eigin View Post
It's not the first time this has happened. You're acting like he's a paranoid madman. It's a tragic incident but with how common crime is over there its justified to be suspicious of noises in your house. He should have checked first but you're making it sound like he has no reason to believe something like that could happen.

People get suspended sentences or probation for manslaughter which is worse than this if this is an accident. You simply don't put people in jail for the hell or it (And given Pistorius is disabled it would cost extra money to house him). He'll suffer psychologically for this, jail time isn't necessary.
Your comments in this thread are sickening. You came in here with your mind already made up that he's innocent and have been desperately trying to clear his name since. Anyone that believes he just opened fire into a bathroom because he thought an intruder was in there, is incredibly naive. He's going to get away with murder because the cops screwed up.

DaaaaB's is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2013, 06:08 PM
  #80
Faidh ar Rud Eigin
Modhnóirí Claonta
 
Faidh ar Rud Eigin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Transcendent
Country: Isle of Man
Posts: 16,681
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaaaaB's View Post
Your comments in this thread are sickening. You came in here with your mind already made up that he's innocent and have been desperately trying to clear his name since. Anyone that believes he just opened fire into a bathroom because he thought an intruder was in there, is incredibly naive. He's going to get away with murder because the cops screwed up.
Your comments are sickening. You're assuming a man decided to kill with malicious intent when all the evidence points to this not being the case.

This is why the age of the lynch mob has passed. Uniformed people who think guilty before proven innocent have no place in discussions like this.

Besides, your post does nothing to describe my posts in this thread. I said wait before evidence comes out to make judgement, and surprise suprise as evidence comes out, the police admit they have no motive, the evidence they leaked to the media turns out to not be what it appeared to be. I in no place said he was innocent (In fact I said even if the charges are dropped he's not innocent because he still killed her even if it was an accident). But go on assuming he's guilty without knowing the context of the incident, nor the facts.

Faidh ar Rud Eigin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-21-2013, 06:23 PM
  #81
Schalkenullvier*
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: tief im westen
Country: Germany
Posts: 4,590
vCash: 500
I don't see how he doesn't at least gets spoken guilty of manslaughter. I mean really, you can legally shoot four times through a bathroom door on an unknown person? Assume it's a burglar all you want, but before you ****ing shoot four times, make sure who you are shooting at. This is grossly negligent. Really if he is not spoken guilty of anything, that would go extremely against my perception of justice.

Schalkenullvier* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 12:46 AM
  #82
KaylaJ
Tungsten!
 
KaylaJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: hell
Country: United States
Posts: 14,830
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jussi View Post
Wow. This is actually beginning to look one tragically fatal accident.
Yeah, I've given up on trying to understand every breaking news article coming out of this and just waiting considering every day it seems like something different happens. I no longer have a real clue about what they think happened and what they can prove happened.

KaylaJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 04:59 AM
  #83
J17 Vs Proclamation
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Reading.
Country: South Korea
Posts: 7,877
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to J17 Vs Proclamation
Quote:
Originally Posted by Faidh ar Rud Eigin View Post
It's not the first time this has happened. You're acting like he's a paranoid madman. It's a tragic incident but with how common crime is over there its justified to be suspicious of noises in your house. He should have checked first but you're making it sound like he has no reason to believe something like that could happen.

People get suspended sentences or probation for manslaughter which is worse than this if this is an accident. You simply don't put people in jail for the hell or it (And given Pistorius is disabled it would cost extra money to house him). He'll suffer psychologically for this, jail time isn't necessary.
Pardon? Doesn't the outcome somewhat imply he should have checked?

Your whole arguments seems to be predicated on "Well, South Africa is a dangerous place, he was defending himself!". Your justification is simply a lazy stereotype formed on what one assumes to be preconcieved biased notions of the defendant.

Whether he's a madman or not doesn't really matter. If indeed it transpires the murder was not premeditated, he still killed a women through incredibly careless actions. That itself, still warrants jail time. History of other crimes and their punishments is irrelevant ; we are assessing this crime.

Finally, the idea that your even using the notion of his disability as justification for no further punishment (It will cost money!) is sickening.

J17 Vs Proclamation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 07:07 AM
  #84
Alklha
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 8,407
vCash: 500
It really does look like that the prosecution are really going to struggle with this. Hopefully they get themselves in order before the actual trial. I am guessing here, but presumably bail trials aren't this thorough and maybe the police are more used to painting as bad a picture as possible and not really being questioned on it at this stage.

I just don't buy the Pistorius defence though. He goes to close the balcony door, he then hears a noise and goes back to the bed to get his gun? Panic will cause many different reactions in people, but I'm pretty sure that anyone who is thinking clearly enough to grab a gun and go and try to confront the "intruder" is going to be thinking clearly enough to check that their loved one is okay. She was only meant to be a few feet away from where he kept his gun, and any intruder in the bathroom would have had to walk through the bedroom... natural instinct is surely to be checking she is okay, verbally/pulling the sheet off the bed, while grabbing the gun. Surely you want her to have some warning of the situation in case something happens to you?

Alklha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 09:23 AM
  #85
Alklha
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 8,407
vCash: 500
Bail is clearly getting granted here. The judge loves the sound of his own voice.

Judge basically laughed at the idea he was a flight risk, and critical of the police due to the lack of evidence provided to back the arguments that Pistorius has a propensity to violence and that there would be a public order risk if bail was granted. Also critical that the police didn't provide details of any property holdings Pistorius has in Italy.

Alklha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 09:37 AM
  #86
Panteras
perennial loser
 
Panteras's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Television sky
Country: United States
Posts: 7,431
vCash: 500
I don't think bail is an issue here ... This is a widely known figure he's not going to escape lol coupled by his obvious disability....the issue will be if at least they find him guilty of manslaughter once the trial begins

Panteras is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 12:07 PM
  #87
Faidh ar Rud Eigin
Modhnóirí Claonta
 
Faidh ar Rud Eigin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Transcendent
Country: Isle of Man
Posts: 16,681
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by J17 Vs Proclamation View Post
Pardon? Doesn't the outcome somewhat imply he should have checked?

Your whole arguments seems to be predicated on "Well, South Africa is a dangerous place, he was defending himself!". Your justification is simply a lazy stereotype formed on what one assumes to be preconcieved biased notions of the defendant.

Whether he's a madman or not doesn't really matter. If indeed it transpires the murder was not premeditated, he still killed a women through incredibly careless actions. That itself, still warrants jail time. History of other crimes and their punishments is irrelevant ; we are assessing this crime.

Finally, the idea that your even using the notion of his disability as justification for no further punishment (It will cost money!) is sickening.
I said he should have checked, but you're dismissing the notion that Pistorius could have even thought someone was in there in the first place. Fact of the matter is, Pistroius isn't the first wealthy South Africa to be suspicous of noises in their house, and act prematurely.

And you're just showing your ignorance of the situation in South Africa by dismissing the fact that South Africa is a very dangerous place, where home invasions by the incredibly poor on the middle and upper classes are extremely common.

Explain why it warrants jail time. It's clearly not murder because he didn't intend to kill her, it's possibly manslaughter/negligence causing death but niether of those guarentee jail time. Look at the reasons you put people in jail:
- Retribution? Sure, but why does retribution need to come in the form of jail time? His reputation is already ruined. He is psychologically scarred and will likely never be the same. Those are enough punishment, why do you risk his life by putting him in jail (And they clearly know this would happen so you can bet he would be placed in isolation).
- Deterence? Pistorius is obviously never going to do this again.
- Rehabilitation? Does not apply.

As I said before, you don't throw someone in jail for the hell of it. If it's not a benefit to society, you don't do it. I fail to see how it is a benefit to send Pistorius to jail if it's not premeditated murder (Which given the evidence it is clearly not).

Faidh ar Rud Eigin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 12:25 PM
  #88
J17 Vs Proclamation
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Reading.
Country: South Korea
Posts: 7,877
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to J17 Vs Proclamation
Quote:
Originally Posted by Faidh ar Rud Eigin View Post
I said he should have checked, but you're dismissing the notion that Pistorius could have even thought someone was in there in the first place. Fact of the matter is, Pistroius isn't the first wealthy South Africa to be suspicous of noises in their house, and act prematurely.
I haven't dismissed anything. I do not have a definitive opinion on whether Pistorious is guilty of premeditated murder or not. Wealth and history cannot be used as hollywood justification.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Faidh ar Rud Eigin View Post
And you're just showing your ignorance of the situation in South Africa by dismissing the fact that South Africa is a very dangerous place, where home invasions by the incredibly poor on the middle and upper classes are extremely common.
This is all baseless conjecture. Shooting and killing your girlfriend through your bathroom door cannot simply be equitted because South Africa has a reputation for being a dangerous place. Life does not work like that, i am afriad. Do you base life decisions on reputations and hearsay, or do you make concise and accurate decisions based on logic? Last time i checked, this isn't a case regarding a home intrusion.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Faidh ar Rud Eigin View Post
Explain why it warrants jail time. It's clearly not murder because he didn't intend to kill her, it's possibly manslaughter/negligence causing death but niether of those guarentee jail time. Look at the reasons you put people in jail:
- Retribution? Sure, but why does retribution need to come in the form of jail time? His reputation is already ruined. He is psychologically scarred and will likely never be the same. Those are enough punishment, why do you risk his life by putting him in jail (And they clearly know this would happen so you can bet he would be placed in isolation).
- Deterence? Pistorius is obviously never going to do this again.
- Rehabilitation? Does not apply.

As I said before, you don't throw someone in jail for the hell of it. If it's not a benefit to society, you don't do it. I fail to see how it is a benefit to send Pistorius to jail if it's not premeditated murder (Which given the evidence it is clearly not).
Because he killed somebody? Negligence? How does that justify an unneccesairy shooting.

You put people in jail because they have committed an act deemed illegal by the state and society. I don't think you have a very good grasp on this.

I mean, your an absolutely preposterous human being. Reputation? Are you seriously suggesting that because A) His brand worth and job are basically gone B) People think of him differently, he should not be sent to Prison? You're a lunatic.

Deterance? This relates to the crime at hand how?

Rehabilitation? ... This is a case about the death of a young women. This isn't a case about Pistorious, his life and the best way to treat him going forward. It's a murder investigation.

Whether it's premeditated murder or not (and until the trial occurs, and more concrete evidence is fully divulged, we won't know), Pistorious committed a crime.

Who knows if he does go to Jail, given the circus act that is ongoing around, but his actions warrant jail time.

J17 Vs Proclamation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 12:26 PM
  #89
Panteras
perennial loser
 
Panteras's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Television sky
Country: United States
Posts: 7,431
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Faidh ar Rud Eigin View Post
It's clearly not murder because he didn't intend to kill her, it's possibly manslaughter/negligence causing death but niether of those guarentee jail time.
- Retribution? Sure, but why does retribution need to come in the form of jail time? His reputation is already ruined. He is psychologically scarred and will likely never be the same. Those are enough punishment, why do you risk his life by putting him in jail (And they clearly know this would happen so you can bet he would be placed in isolation).
- Deterence? Pistorius is obviously never going to do this again.
- Rehabilitation? Does not apply.
You accuse people of already making false accusations while not knowing all the facts, yet keep spouting what seem to be pretty solidly made up resolutions on what took place and how this should be handled simply from the perceived notions of South Africa? You keep talking about how we shouldn't just "throw people in jail" I pray that you never have to go to jury duty....

"It's clearly not murder" ---yeah seems like you're pretty much made up on this and trial hasn't even started.

"He's psychologically scarred"-- You're right I mean after all if he cried and said he's scarred for life now than that's it .. What are we even doing , send the guy home already !!!

Panteras is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 01:00 PM
  #90
Faidh ar Rud Eigin
Modhnóirí Claonta
 
Faidh ar Rud Eigin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Transcendent
Country: Isle of Man
Posts: 16,681
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Panteras View Post
You accuse people of already making false accusations while not knowing all the facts, yet keep spouting what seem to be pretty solidly made up resolutions on what took place and how this should be handled simply from the perceived notions of South Africa? You keep talking about how we shouldn't just "throw people in jail" I pray that you never have to go to jury duty....

"It's clearly not murder" ---yeah seems like you're pretty much made up on this and trial hasn't even started.

"He's psychologically scarred"-- You're right I mean after all if he cried and said he's scarred for life now than that's it .. What are we even doing , send the guy home already !!!
I'm basing my opinion on what's been presented so far. Can you tell me that I'm wrong with what's came out already? The police have no motive, they've all but admitted they've tried to make the most negative conontations from what they've gathered. They've allowed newspapers and media outlets to publish blatantly false information without saying it's wong.

Stuff can change, but given what's been said in the mini-trial (And that's what a bail hearing in South Africa is, a mini-trial), it doesn't sound like murder, it sounds like negligence.

I'm not sure you've been following this at all, nor do you know what the effect of accidently killing a loved one is. You're clearly jumping to conclusions that he's some psychopath who planned to do this (Yet the evidence doesn't support this what so ever).

Quote:
Originally Posted by J17 Vs Proclamation View Post
I haven't dismissed anything. I do not have a definitive opinion on whether Pistorious is guilty of premeditated murder or not. Wealth and history cannot be used as hollywood justification.



This is all baseless conjecture. Shooting and killing your girlfriend through your bathroom door cannot simply be equitted because South Africa has a reputation for being a dangerous place. Life does not work like that, i am afriad. Do you base life decisions on reputations and hearsay, or do you make concise and accurate decisions based on logic? Last time i checked, this isn't a case regarding a home intrusion.





Because he killed somebody? Negligence? How does that justify an unneccesairy shooting.

You put people in jail because they have committed an act deemed illegal by the state and society. I don't think you have a very good grasp on this.

I mean, your an absolutely preposterous human being. Reputation? Are you seriously suggesting that because A) His brand worth and job are basically gone B) People think of him differently, he should not be sent to Prison? You're a lunatic.

Deterance? This relates to the crime at hand how?

Rehabilitation? ... This is a case about the death of a young women. This isn't a case about Pistorious, his life and the best way to treat him going forward. It's a murder investigation.

Whether it's premeditated murder or not (and until the trial occurs, and more concrete evidence is fully divulged, we won't know), Pistorious committed a crime.

Who knows if he does go to Jail, given the circus act that is ongoing around, but his actions warrant jail time.
This is an awful post that I really don't to waste my time on.

You have dismissed plenty. You're balking at the notion that someone can be fearful of possible intruders and jump to conclusions too soon, showing your ignorance of the situation in South Africa. You say you have no opinion on whether it is an accident or not yet you then go on to say that fear for an intruder is not an excuse.

You do not put people in jail for the hell of it. And that's what you just said. "You commited a crime, you go to jail". I hope you realize how over simplistic that claim is, but I suspect you don't because you're just going to reply and said the same thing over without adressing what I said. Why doesn't everyone who commits a crime go to jail then?

You evaluate whether a person should go to jail based on particular objectives and mitigating/aggrevating factors. Three basic objectives are the ones I talked about, retribution ("Justice"), deterence and rehabilitation.

You're arguements refuting why he shouldn't go to jail are so horribly bad I'm pretty sure you don't understand what I'm saying. Where did I say he shouldn't go to jail because it would hurt his reputation? I didn't, you simply saw that word and decided to write a double fallacy, ad hominem and a strawman. I said the damage to his reputation and psychological harm that he will remember forever are enough punishment for a negligent homicide or manslaughter charge. That's why people charged with these crimes often simply get a suspended sentence or probation, because the punishment in non-punitive degrees is enough.

Deterence relates to any evaluation of whether a person gets jail time or not. It's a sentencing objective, and it does not apply in this case; as I already said but you felt the need to ask me of it did, because Pistorius is obviously not going to do this again.

I'm not even going to adress what you said about the third reason why people go to jail because you're just rambling and not addressing what I said.

People go to jail to serve a purpose, not just because they commited a crime. You clearly don't understand the justice system if you think that if you commit a crime you automatically have to go to jail for it.

Tell me, what purpose does Pistorius going to jail serve? He has already suffered retribution in the form of psychological and career harm. He is clearly no danger to reoffend and he does not need to be rehabilitated.

I've already admitted he's not innocent yet you're arguing me saying he didn't commit a crime. I said there is no reason for him to go to jail if it's not premeditated murder, and you haven't refuted that in the slightest.

Faidh ar Rud Eigin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 05:01 PM
  #91
J17 Vs Proclamation
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Reading.
Country: South Korea
Posts: 7,877
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to J17 Vs Proclamation
This isn't a case to judge what is the right course of action for the defendants character and needs. This is a case to determine whether the defendant is guilty of a crime, a crime that lends itself to jail time.

What annoys me about you, and i see this in nearly all your debates, is the holy than thou attitude that precedes to engage in a circular debate. The constant "You haven't proved me wrong", or "Strawman alert" grows entirely tedious. I've made my points, points which do answer and relate to the questions and ideas posed by yourself. If you choose not to agree with these ideas, that remains your perogative, but please, cut the bull**** cliche rhetoric.

The fact is ; Pristorious at best (or worst) made several poor decisions that led to the demise of another life. He is unequiovally the reason for this death. Justifications for his actions, i.e His country of residence, or suffering enough (Reputation ruined etc), are entirely inconsequential. South Africa may have a high intrusion rate, however A) This is not the case here B) He had no evidence of such C) He shot dead an innocent women. As impressive as your knowledge of South Africa is, and as naive as we may be, it doesn't change the above.

And the fact that anybody is supposed to consider how his reputation has been ruined, or if he's a future threat (Given whether it's premedidated murder or not, it's a very specific circumstance, and if he's a gun owner who makes decisions like this ... well) isn't really the point. The women's dead, the crime committed, and it's pretty hard to say doesn't warrant jail time for man slaughter.

J17 Vs Proclamation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 05:50 PM
  #92
DaaaaB's
Registered User
 
DaaaaB's's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Faidh ar Rud Eigin View Post
Your comments are sickening. You're assuming a man decided to kill with malicious intent when all the evidence points to this not being the case.

This is why the age of the lynch mob has passed. Uniformed people who think guilty before proven innocent have no place in discussions like this.

Besides, your post does nothing to describe my posts in this thread. I said wait before evidence comes out to make judgement, and surprise suprise as evidence comes out, the police admit they have no motive, the evidence they leaked to the media turns out to not be what it appeared to be. I in no place said he was innocent (In fact I said even if the charges are dropped he's not innocent because he still killed her even if it was an accident). But go on assuming he's guilty without knowing the context of the incident, nor the facts.
I was going to reply to this but I read the rest of the thread first and since you've already been owned by J17 & Panteras, I'm not going to bother.

DaaaaB's is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-22-2013, 09:28 PM
  #93
Faidh ar Rud Eigin
Modhnóirí Claonta
 
Faidh ar Rud Eigin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Transcendent
Country: Isle of Man
Posts: 16,681
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by J17 Vs Proclamation View Post
This isn't a case to judge what is the right course of action for the defendants character and needs. This is a case to determine whether the defendant is guilty of a crime, a crime that lends itself to jail time.

What annoys me about you, and i see this in nearly all your debates, is the holy than thou attitude that precedes to engage in a circular debate. The constant "You haven't proved me wrong", or "Strawman alert" grows entirely tedious. I've made my points, points which do answer and relate to the questions and ideas posed by yourself. If you choose not to agree with these ideas, that remains your perogative, but please, cut the bull**** cliche rhetoric.

The fact is ; Pristorious at best (or worst) made several poor decisions that led to the demise of another life. He is unequiovally the reason for this death. Justifications for his actions, i.e His country of residence, or suffering enough (Reputation ruined etc), are entirely inconsequential. South Africa may have a high intrusion rate, however A) This is not the case here B) He had no evidence of such C) He shot dead an innocent women. As impressive as your knowledge of South Africa is, and as naive as we may be, it doesn't change the above.

And the fact that anybody is supposed to consider how his reputation has been ruined, or if he's a future threat (Given whether it's premedidated murder or not, it's a very specific circumstance, and if he's a gun owner who makes decisions like this ... well) isn't really the point. The women's dead, the crime committed, and it's pretty hard to say doesn't warrant jail time for man slaughter.
And again with you rambling about things I'm not talking about. Please point out (Without just stating it which is what you've done over your past posts) where I've "judged what is the right course of action for the defendants character and needs". I said psychological and career based harm that he's recieved because of this is enough justice for his negligent actions that jail is not neccesary. But you decided to twist this as me saying he shouldn't go to jail because he has certain "needs".

You get annoyed I point out your ridiculous argumentative fallacies? I'm not going to simply sit there and let you tell me I said something I didn't, that my arguement is something that it's not. That's your problem. It's not a "holier than thou" attiude on the other persons end, it's your problem for continuing to use strawmans and other logical fallacies to try to prove yourself right. Stop ****ing trying to tell me I'm saying something that is completely different from what I'm writing in my posts and maybe I won't have to call you out on it.

I'm not going to bother with the rest because it's the same crap as the last one. You're not adressing what I'm saying at all. Actually reply to my post next time instead of pouting about me telling you to do it. You've yet to answer the first question I posted to you, that is: Justify why; if it turns out not to be premeditated murder, he should go to jail and what purpose does it serve. Don't give me some crap that I'm defending his actions, because I'm not. I said it serves no purpose for him to go to jail if it's not premeditated murder because he's already had punishment come in other ways.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaaaaB's View Post
I was going to reply to this but I read the rest of the thread first and since you've already been owned by J17 & Panteras, I'm not going to bother.
I love when people make posts like this. All it says is "I can't refute this, so to save face I'll say someone else 'beat' them and I'll look like I'm smart".

Faidh ar Rud Eigin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2013, 06:35 AM
  #94
J17 Vs Proclamation
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Reading.
Country: South Korea
Posts: 7,877
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to J17 Vs Proclamation
Quote:
Originally Posted by Faidh ar Rud Eigin View Post
And again with you rambling about things I'm not talking about. Please point out (Without just stating it which is what you've done over your past posts) where I've "judged what is the right course of action for the defendants character and needs". I said psychological and career based harm that he's recieved because of this is enough justice for his negligent actions that jail is not neccesary. But you decided to twist this as me saying he shouldn't go to jail because he has certain "needs".
Sigh. Implying pyschological and career repercussions is justice for his "negligent" (and LOL at that particular choice of lexis) implicity means you are "deciding" he shouldn't go to jail because he has certain "needs". This isn't a case to determine the best cause of action for Pistorious and his character. This is a case determining the culpability of his actions, and the due punishments that are warranted. Your basing the decision on Pistorious and the impact it has on his life.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Faidh ar Rud Eigin View Post
You get annoyed I point out your ridiculous argumentative fallacies? I'm not going to simply sit there and let you tell me I said something I didn't, that my arguement is something that it's not. That's your problem. It's not a "holier than thou" attiude on the other persons end, it's your problem for continuing to use strawmans and other logical fallacies to try to prove yourself right. Stop ****ing trying to tell me I'm saying something that is completely different from what I'm writing in my posts and maybe I won't have to call you out on it.
Do you even understand what a fallacy is? I see you've read the Faidh ar Rud Eigin Strawman principle ; 1) Ignore reasoning and opposition points 2) Play the "You're putting words in my mouth" to evade the actual topic at hand 3) 3 ... 2 ... 11 implement STRAWMAN!!!!

You're a lunatic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Faidh ar Rud Eigin View Post
I'm not going to bother with the rest because it's the same crap as the last one. You're not adressing what I'm saying at all. Actually reply to my post next time instead of pouting about me telling you to do it. You've yet to answer the first question I posted to you, that is: Justify why; if it turns out not to be premeditated murder, he should go to jail and what purpose does it serve. Don't give me some crap that I'm defending his actions, because I'm not. I said it serves no purpose for him to go to jail if it's not premeditated murder because he's already had punishment come in other ways.
You mean the same crap you happen to not agree with? There is a difference between disagreeing with reasoning and simply disregarding said reasoning. If you disagree with the reasoning, again, fine, but to act as if reasoning and justification for our points of view hasn't been given, is somewhat bizarre. I entirely disagree with your view of this entire situation, but i don't deny you offered reasons/points to address these views.





Quote:
Originally Posted by Faidh ar Rud Eigin View Post
I love when people make posts like this. All it says is "I can't refute this, so to save face I'll say someone else 'beat' them and I'll look like I'm smart".
You seem to possess some sort of competition complex.

J17 Vs Proclamation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2013, 07:57 AM
  #95
Faidh ar Rud Eigin
Modhnóirí Claonta
 
Faidh ar Rud Eigin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Transcendent
Country: Isle of Man
Posts: 16,681
vCash: 500
What a shock, same crap again, no addressing points just a rehash of old ideas and getting even angrier at me pointing out your fallacies.

Fact of the matter is if Pistorius is not guilty of premeditated murder, but a lesser charge of manslaughter or criminal negligence causing death, it's very possible he gets nothing. Psychological, reputation and remorse are all mitigating factors. You have yet to tell me why this isn't the case.

Faidh ar Rud Eigin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2013, 09:37 AM
  #96
J17 Vs Proclamation
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Reading.
Country: South Korea
Posts: 7,877
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to J17 Vs Proclamation
Quote:
Originally Posted by Faidh ar Rud Eigin View Post
What a shock, same crap again, no addressing points just a rehash of old ideas and getting even angrier at me pointing out your fallacies.

Fact of the matter is if Pistorius is not guilty of premeditated murder, but a lesser charge of manslaughter or criminal negligence causing death, it's very possible he gets nothing. Psychological, reputation and remorse are all mitigating factors. You have yet to tell me why this isn't the case.
Do you lack reading comprehension? Time and time again, these "fallacies" (Or strawman!) have been explained.

Angry? lol ... i don't even ....

Reputation of the defendant isn't a mitigating factor in determining crime. You're a lunatic if you think how he's percieved after this should be a consideration.

J17 Vs Proclamation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2013, 02:16 PM
  #97
Faidh ar Rud Eigin
Modhnóirí Claonta
 
Faidh ar Rud Eigin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Transcendent
Country: Isle of Man
Posts: 16,681
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by J17 Vs Proclamation View Post
Do you lack reading comprehension? Time and time again, these "fallacies" (Or strawman!) have been explained.

Angry? lol ... i don't even ....

Reputation of the defendant isn't a mitigating factor in determining crime. You're a lunatic if you think how he's percieved after this should be a consideration.
It absolutely is because it affects his career. You don't understand goals of sentencing one bit.

Faidh ar Rud Eigin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2013, 02:21 PM
  #98
J17 Vs Proclamation
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Reading.
Country: South Korea
Posts: 7,877
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to J17 Vs Proclamation
Quote:
Originally Posted by Faidh ar Rud Eigin View Post
It absolutely is because it affects his career. You don't understand goals of sentencing one bit.
I must have missed the memo that said the likely dropping of his sponsorships for example are related to this case in any way. Now that i know Oscar is going to financial lose .... he doesn't deserve prison. How will he afford that brand new Pagani? I forgive him for the reckless and stupid decision that led to the death of this young women.

Oh wait ....

You're a lunatic.

J17 Vs Proclamation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2013, 07:07 PM
  #99
Stanley Foobrick
Clockwork Blue
 
Stanley Foobrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Fooville, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,866
vCash: 500
Ridiculous to see he gets bail here. Tells me something other than the law is already at work here. At this rate I fully expect him to be found innocent.

Stanley Foobrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-23-2013, 07:38 PM
  #100
Fish on The Sand
Untouchable
 
Fish on The Sand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Nanaimo
Country: Canada
Posts: 50,616
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue'sClues View Post
Ridiculous to see he gets bail here. Tells me something other than the law is already at work here. At this rate I fully expect him to be found innocent.
How is it ridiculous he gets bail?

Fish on The Sand is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:44 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.