3 ms·
"Who in their right mind goes around serving up seizures..." I agree violence should be met with appropriate justice. Circumstances and context are rarely as
by hl5 10y ago
"Who in their right mind goes around serving up seizures..."
I agree violence should be met with appropriate justice.
Circumstances and context are rarely as cut and dried as your honest question. For example, there are some people alive that I'd rather they not be. Without context only a psychopath would think that. But if I add "9/11 victim" as context? Then you not only get it, you're on board.
It's the same here. On the surface it's shocking and offensive, but when you learn of prior behavior it becomes reasonable to doubt a reporter that hid his direct participation in news stories he was reporting. It seems more likely to me the victim seeks fame and fortune rather than justice.
The medium is relevant due to state lines. This is a Federal offense, where the guilty party goes to big boy prison and never gets a good job interview again. For what is widely viewed as an Internet prank. Pretty sure there's a Simpson episode with a similar prank too.
Disabled people have many precautions they take just to get thru each day. Many are required by law to report their medical status on a regular basis. It's not a stretch to ask if any precautions were taken in this case because if none were and a doctor had advised the victim differently there is less merit here.
- catshirt 10y agohm. i think we're seeing eye to eye. you seem more willing to speculate but that is not an offense. the only points i wanted to make are: 1. first amendment does not mean you can say or do whatever you wish 2. if the we can assume the facts are correct, the guy should be punished accordingly which, if i understand correctly, are two points you'd not even disagree with, barring any new evidence.