Thursday, January 20, 2011

In which Japete demonstrates, once again, that facts

really don't matter to her. And her friends & minions.
I am just amazed that you guys are trying to rewrite commonly held American views on what happened during the awful period with the KKK and civil rights.
'Commonly held views'. She doesn't dispute the facts(I guess she's grown tired of having her ass handed to her when she does), she's seriously bent out of shape because the facts pointed out don't match up with the 'commonly held views' she wants to push.

Whole thing here, found thanks to Robb

By the way, didn't Condoleeza Rice mention her father keeping loaded guns handy to keep the night riders away? Of course, that would 'alarm' Japete horribly if you brought up


Marja said...

Off topic, sort of. Example of Finnish justice from yesterday's paper: A man hears somebody trying to break through his door, grabs a knife and opens it. Behind is a burglar holding a crowbar and a can of pepper spray. Burglar sprays homeowner on the face. Homeowner panics and starts flailing with the knife, hitting the burglar 14 times but causing no serious damage.

Homeowner gets a year and a half in jail, has to pay the burglar 1500 euros for pain, 500 euros for cosmetic damage (scarring, presumably) and 200 euros for causing mental anguish.

The homeowner should have seen that the burglar didn't have a knife (as if a crowbar can't be used as a weapon, and of course you can think clearly in that situation, blinded with pepper spray and in panic) and so hitting him fourteen times was excessive. The homeowner did, admittedly, have a previous conviction about knife use.

Good thing, most of the comments on the story are on the side of the homeowner. Even if he may have been some sort of crook in this case (and even crooks presumably should have the right of defending themselves when somebody attacks them without provocation) there have been several similar cases of very clear self-defense where the victim defended himself a bit too vigorously and was punished for it. We are presumed to be able to act with clear heads and to be able to judge the exact moment when the attacker has been hurt just enough, even those persons who have never in their lives met any sort of violence before. And if you happen to find a burglar in your home and he doesn't actually attack you you can't really do nothing else except call the police and tell him, preferably politely, that you have done so, while he goes through your jewelry and carries your computer out, unless you want to risk ending up paying him, and even jail time (yeah, that's actual advice from a lawyer...). Jeez!

Oh please, pray enough people are starting to get fed up here that we will finally start to vote those people out of office.

Windy Wilson said...

Marja, Interesting story, and it points up the fallacy of proportional force. How do you factor in the difference in weapons or age or strength or surprise? Or does the state, in its infinite wisdom, simply zero those out as unknowable and demand the 75 year old woman trade blow for blow with the 25 year old thug?
And once the homeowner has been blinded by the pepper spray, how is he to know when the aggressor (spraying pepper spray in this situation was not defensive when the erstwhile burglar should have immediately retreated)has ceased being aggressive? Particularly if he sticks around?
Besides which, wasn't there a trial-by-combat paring that was used in the middle ages that had just such a difference in weapons? I mean, club v knife.

Firehand, I have to say I like the news items you select for inclusion in your blog -- and you get generally good comments, too.

Sigivald said...

One wonders if she denies that MLK applied for a concealed carry permit and was denied by local racist cops thanks to "may issue".