New York Silliness

The Druids Grove combined Off Topic Forum. Politics, science, random oddities - discuss them all here. - Low Moderation
Fyyr
Posts: 294
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 2:32 am

New York Silliness

Post by Fyyr » Thu Sep 01, 2011 9:01 pm

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/02/nyreg ... ss&emc=rss
“I should have put a bullet through you years ago,” Margaret Goldsmith, 59, screamed at her husband, ...

Why the hell are not women arrested when they start domestic disputes?

If Tiger Woods had smashed his wife's car with golf clubs, causing her to crash it,,,you can sure as hell believe Tiger would have been sent to jail.


Nope, if you're a girl, you get a pass. Sugar and spice, my raging anal hemorrhoids. Where are all the Feminists when a woman really needs to be treated like a man?

Dude gets fired because he married a cunt. I don't get it.

User avatar
Tudamorf
Posts: 369
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:45 am
Location: San Francisco

Re: New York Silliness

Post by Tudamorf » Thu Sep 01, 2011 10:36 pm

Fyyr wrote:
“I should have put a bullet through you years ago,” Margaret Goldsmith, 59, screamed at her husband, ...
Why the hell are not women arrested when they start domestic disputes?
Free speech?

Or do you libertarians now support thoughtcrimes?

Fyyr
Posts: 294
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 2:32 am

Re: New York Silliness

Post by Fyyr » Fri Sep 02, 2011 3:19 am

Starting a fight with words is not a thought crime, Tudamorf.

Assault is a valid, and real crime. If other libertarians disagree with that, then I disagree with them. And assault is only words.

User avatar
Tudamorf
Posts: 369
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:45 am
Location: San Francisco

Re: New York Silliness

Post by Tudamorf » Fri Sep 02, 2011 4:15 am

Fyyr wrote:Starting a fight with words is not a thought crime, Tudamorf.
"I wish I had killed you years ago."

If I say that to you, it is NOT a crime (unless I mean it as some sort of immediate future threat to kill you). It is not assault, it is not battery, it is not domestic violence.

It is free speech, constitutionally protected, and not even "fighting words" that could (hypothetically) be legislated against.

If, in response to my statement, "I wish I had killed you years ago," you shove me, grab me, and threaten me physically, you are now committing a crime and will go to jail. You cannot legally defend yourself against words (thoughts) with fists, because in our society thoughtcrime is generally frowned upon except for a few activities like sex. (I thought libertarians understood, and agreed with, this.)

Now, if the wife had started the physical fight, you might have had a point, but according to your article she didn't.

Fyyr
Posts: 294
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 2:32 am

Re: New York Silliness

Post by Fyyr » Tue Sep 06, 2011 4:00 am

Well, despite the fact that gay couples generally have greater and more violent domestic disputes than heterosexual couples(and this is of course kept on the down low, sshhhh).

It doesn't look like you have been in any long term relationship of either type for this to have been a problem for you.

Honestly, fight words should be considered as starting or instigating a crime if it progresses. And at some times, actual battery, should be considered as an anti-crime. in some situations. I nice good slap should be legal in certain situations. A nice little deserved pop that only leaves a blanch-able red mark,,,that would cut enormous law enforcement, incarceration, and legal costs.

Remember that case where Richard Simmons was in line at the airport. And some tall muscular dude behind him called him a fruity little faggot, while in line. And Richard turned around and slapped him. That should be completely legal and accepted. But in our culture, the big huge muscular dude gets to sue Simmons for millions of dollars, when he started the situation. No, a nice good Greta Garbo or Vivien Leigh slap should be accepted or permissible, when it is deserved

Fyyr
Posts: 294
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2010 2:32 am

Re: New York Silliness

Post by Fyyr » Tue Sep 06, 2011 4:02 am

Let me ask this, if this fight were started by another man, and this man responded...in a bar.

Would he still have his job, or not?


If you Tudamorf, walked up to this guy in a bar. Said the things that she said, or equivalent. And he pushed you, and threw down his cell phone during this.

Do you really think that he should lose his job over it? Or that he did anything unnatural?

Now imagine if you will, that the man that you just started this fight with, spends tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars on you every year. Feeding you, clothing you, feeding your fucking brats, buying you clothes and jewelry, bought your cars. Paying for your pedicures and all the other things that you demand of him. And now you start this shit....?

Prop 8? Fuck that shit, there should be a law REQUIRING you to have to get married. Why should you all have the fun?

AbyssalMage
Posts: 156
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 12:06 am

Re: New York Silliness

Post by AbyssalMage » Thu Sep 08, 2011 1:05 am

Fyyr wrote:http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/02/nyreg ... ss&emc=rss
“I should have put a bullet through you years ago,” Margaret Goldsmith, 59, screamed at her husband, ...

Why the hell are not women arrested when they start domestic disputes?
I think the question basically comes down to is "did the husband feel threatened by the statement?" I don't think the officers had enough evidence to prove that it wasn't anything more than free speech by the wife. I'm sure their is enough evidence for him (the husband) to get a restraining order (for all the good those do /heavy dose of sarcasm) in a court of law if he truly believed his wife would hurt him. But I have to agree, on the surface (and not knowing all the facts) it was nothing more than free speech.

But I agree, it does raise the thorny issue that if a guy had said the same thing, he probably would of been arrested "just in case", even if their was no evidence of actual intent of causing bodily harm, past or present.
Nope, if you're a girl, you get a pass.
That's American/European culture for you :oops: . But the perception of "girls are made of sugar and spice and everything nice" is slowly dissipating thanks to all the girls acting badly on reality T.V. shows (I guess they're good for something after all). But it's a VERY SLOW process.

Now if CPS would only put a stop to all the children beauty pageants (TLC's Toddlers & Tiaras) because its just teaching the wrong thing to them. You want to build self confidence in young women, teach them how to debate, become an entrepreneur and run their own business, sports, community activities, or hell, just be a parent. Those kids on the show are the next generations "New Jersey Shore."

/steps off the soap box for Tudamorf or Fyyr

User avatar
Tudamorf
Posts: 369
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:45 am
Location: San Francisco

Re: New York Silliness

Post by Tudamorf » Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:00 am

Fyyr wrote:Honestly, fight words should be considered as starting or instigating a crime if it progresses. And at some times, actual battery, should be considered as an anti-crime. in some situations.
Such bald-faced hypocrisy. Do you libertarians rationalize it somehow, or do you know you're full of it and just pretend?

Isn't your motto, that your right to swing your fist ends at my face?
Fyyr wrote:Remember that case where Richard Simmons was in line at the airport. And some tall muscular dude behind him called him a fruity little faggot, while in line. And Richard turned around and slapped him. That should be completely legal and accepted. But in our culture, the big huge muscular dude gets to sue Simmons for millions of dollars, when he started the situation.
Violence is never justified on account of words, unless they are connected with violence. Your legal choices are to respond with words, or (more wisely) to ignore it.

So no, slapping shouldn't be legal. However, the punishment should be proportional to the crime. A slap shouldn't be grounds for a big settlement, or prison time.

User avatar
Tudamorf
Posts: 369
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2010 2:45 am
Location: San Francisco

Re: New York Silliness

Post by Tudamorf » Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:08 am

Fyyr wrote:Let me ask this, if this fight were started by another man, and this man responded...in a bar.

Would he still have his job, or not?
Probably, but that's all political, not legal. He would still be committing a crime.
Fyyr wrote:Now imagine if you will, that the man that you just started this fight with, spends tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars on you every year. Feeding you, clothing you, feeding your fucking brats, buying you clothes and jewelry, bought your cars. Paying for your pedicures and all the other things that you demand of him. And now you start this shit....?
It's your fault for being dumb enough to sign a legal agreement where you have all the burdens and none of the benefits, so don't cry about it now.

You don't get to commit free crimes just because you're an idiot, and you don't realize you can happily have sex, even children, without marriage in any rational part of this nation.

erianaiel
Posts: 66
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2010 2:33 am

Re: New York Silliness

Post by erianaiel » Sun Sep 11, 2011 7:40 am

Fyyr wrote:Now imagine if you will, that the man that you just started this fight with, spends tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars on you every year. Feeding you, clothing you, feeding your fucking brats, buying you clothes and jewelry, bought your cars. Paying for your pedicures and all the other things that you demand of him. And now you start this shit....?
We are well aware that you think all women are prostitutes (and asub-human species) and deserve to be done to whatever the big might he-man does to them.
No really, we got that about a hundred posts ago.

Now please stop dragging this same tired old subject out. Again.


Eri

Post Reply