Originally posted by: halik
what a fvcking kunt, they need to sterilize her asap
Originally posted by: Viper GTS
Originally posted by: aidanjm
My sympathies go out to the young lesbian. If you don't want things like this to happen, then create a society where lesbian girls don't feel like they have to kill themselves. I have trouble caring much about the death wife and kids.
Psst, your agenda is showing.
Like no guy has ever killed himself after being turned down by a girl (or vice-versa).
This has absolutely nothing to do with gay, yet of course you would leap to make the association.
Viper GTS
Originally posted by: Goosemaster
Originally posted by: waggy
Originally posted by: jagec
Originally posted by: her209
I know that, thus my question.Originally posted by: Inspector Jihad
she dint die, the mom in the daewoo didOriginally posted by: her209
Aren't Mercedes known for safety?
Yup, pretty dumb way of committing suicide.
Then again, girls have a MUCH lower success rate at it than guys...
yeap they say when a girl try's it its actually a cry for help. where guys really want to succeed (well most times)
To guys.:beer:
When we want out, we go out like men.
Originally posted by: aidanjm
My sympathies go out to the young lesbian. If you don't want things like this to happen, then create a society where lesbian girls don't feel like they have to kill themselves. I have trouble caring much about the death wife and kids.
Originally posted by: KevinF
But what does putting the girl in jail for the rest of her life solve? She's not a danger to society.
Our culture crushed her.
Originally posted by: mchammer
Yea we should use ignore list for him. Gives a bad name to gays too.
Originally posted by: KevinF
But what does putting the girl in jail for the rest of her life solve? She's not a danger to society.
Our culture crushed her.
Originally posted by: KevinF
But what does putting the girl in jail for the rest of her life solve? She's not a danger to society.
Our culture crushed her.
Originally posted by: Jeff7
If you want to kill yourself, do so without causing other people misery. Use a means that will not endanger others.
And it may sound callous, but I'd say to allow her to finish what she attempted. She obviously does not wish to live, and she's also a danger to others. Why keep someone alive if all they're going to do is cause and endure suffering? Right to choose to die FTW.
Originally posted by: Vegitto
Originally posted by: Jeff7
If you want to kill yourself, do so without causing other people misery. Use a means that will not endanger others.
And it may sound callous, but I'd say to allow her to finish what she attempted. She obviously does not wish to live, and she's also a danger to others. Why keep someone alive if all they're going to do is cause and endure suffering? Right to choose to die FTW.
Of course not. She should suffer for what she did, and seeing how being alive made her suffer, I vote for keeping her alive in a cold, 2 by 2 cell.
Originally posted by: Jeff7
If you want to kill yourself, do so without causing other people misery. Use a means that will not endanger others.
And it may sound callous, but I'd say to allow her to finish what she attempted. She obviously does not wish to live, and she's also a danger to others. Why keep someone alive if all they're going to do is cause and endure suffering? Right to choose to die FTW.
Before hitting the gas, Brunstad had sent a text message to the student she had a crush on, said Paul Howard, the Fulton County district attorney. "She was actually counting down her imminent threat: 'Nine, eight, seven, six ... I'm going to do it.' "
Originally posted by: waggy
I think they should give her what she wants. kill her now.
No kidding. Neal Boortz had that in his daily this morning. She needs a bullet.Originally posted by: Queasy
Holy God...they updated the article including this bit:
Before hitting the gas, Brunstad had sent a text message to the student she had a crush on, said Paul Howard, the Fulton County district attorney. "She was actually counting down her imminent threat: 'Nine, eight, seven, six ... I'm going to do it.' "
Originally posted by: Goosemaster
Originally posted by: IAteYourMother
Originally posted by: Goosemaster
Originally posted by: SmoochyTX
Give me a break. It's the daughter's fault. Not her parents. Maybe some day in this world, people will be held responsible for their own actions.Originally posted by: unfalliblekrutch
Originally posted by: Goosemaster
1. there were many delightful walls around that she could have shared her last moments with. I'm sure none of them would have minded.
2. At the end of the day, she proved to be the epitomke of selfish ignorance. She is pathetic. She lsot, and will probably enver ever ahve any pride i nthe rest of her pathetic life. She forfeited it all when she decided to disregard everythign abotu everyone.
3. I really hope they don't sue the parent too badly. It was the girl who committed the act.
It's the parent's fault for not noticing their daughter was suicidal. They should have sensed something was wrong and done something about it.
The the legal guardians, and its not so much that she won't take responsibility, but as a matter ofa law, the parents fall under the umbrella of responsibility and in this case are open to [ 'OMFG THEY ARE GOING TO ABSOLUTELY DESTROY US IN THE COURT"] litigation
so the parents can be sued even though the girl is being tried as an adult? hmmmm
We probably agree that such a thing is below us, below many, and should be below all.
Opertunists abound however, and the odds are high that the parents will be targeted.
We can be noble and hoenst with ourselves all we want, but by no means do our own beliefs govern or dictate the perogatives of the greedy.
Such is the unfortunate truth I guess. Ok, so suicide may cause misery that I'm sure the suicidal person may not wish to cause, but at least it can definitely be done without causing death or physical injury to anyone else.Originally posted by: iroast
Originally posted by: Jeff7
If you want to kill yourself, do so without causing other people misery. Use a means that will not endanger others.
And it may sound callous, but I'd say to allow her to finish what she attempted. She obviously does not wish to live, and she's also a danger to others. Why keep someone alive if all they're going to do is cause and endure suffering? Right to choose to die FTW.
Killing yourself will cause misery to others no matter what. It's better to join the army and do something useful.
Originally posted by: Taughnter
Originally posted by: Goosemaster
Originally posted by: IAteYourMother
Originally posted by: Goosemaster
Originally posted by: SmoochyTX
Give me a break. It's the daughter's fault. Not her parents. Maybe some day in this world, people will be held responsible for their own actions.Originally posted by: unfalliblekrutch
Originally posted by: Goosemaster
1. there were many delightful walls around that she could have shared her last moments with. I'm sure none of them would have minded.
2. At the end of the day, she proved to be the epitomke of selfish ignorance. She is pathetic. She lsot, and will probably enver ever ahve any pride i nthe rest of her pathetic life. She forfeited it all when she decided to disregard everythign abotu everyone.
3. I really hope they don't sue the parent too badly. It was the girl who committed the act.
It's the parent's fault for not noticing their daughter was suicidal. They should have sensed something was wrong and done something about it.
The the legal guardians, and its not so much that she won't take responsibility, but as a matter ofa law, the parents fall under the umbrella of responsibility and in this case are open to [ 'OMFG THEY ARE GOING TO ABSOLUTELY DESTROY US IN THE COURT"] litigation
so the parents can be sued even though the girl is being tried as an adult? hmmmm
We probably agree that such a thing is below us, below many, and should be below all.
Opertunists abound however, and the odds are high that the parents will be targeted.
We can be noble and hoenst with ourselves all we want, but by no means do our own beliefs govern or dictate the perogatives of the greedy.
You're right, the parents will be targeted. Simply put, our legal system does allow a monetary recovery for situations like this including emotional damages. Is it wrong for this woman's husband and children to receive any money? They lost a loved one as well as someone who provided monetary support. It's cold, but she was at least a source of income and a caretaker for her children. I honestly don't think recovering money is a matter of greed.
Why should the parents being targeted change anything? Their child was driving their car. You pretty much have to sue the car owner in a situation like this, not to mention the fact that they are the parents of the girl. Even if you don't think they are responsible for her emotional state, who do you think the legal liability falls on?
I honestly don't know if the parents WILL be held liable for any damages, but that's not even my point. Maybe they will, maybe they won't. I'm guessing that will depend on the circumstances surrounding how the daughter got the keys to the Mercedes and what the Agency law is like wherever this occurred. All I'm saying is, why would suing the parents be greedy or opportunistic?
I think the original issue was whether the girl being tried as an adult should change the parents liability. First off, civil and criminal cases are entirely separate. Second, the parents liability isn't necessarily related to them being a "parent", it may be tied to their entrustment of the vehicle or simply ownership status. You are right about one thing, it does certainly seem strange that the girl could be tried as an adult, yet not be legally (monetarily) responsible as one, but that is in fact the case.
T