3 ms·

The subject of the article killed two men, and is now living on social security and subsidized housing. If I was family of the two killed men I would be furiou

The subject of the article killed two men, and is now living on social security and subsidized housing. If I was family of the two killed men I would be furious.

rayiner 4y ago
renewiltord 4y ago
Woah, I've seen that dude by Leavenworth and GG Ave, I think. Damn, I walk around there casually not knowing there's dudes who have gone and killed multiple people just chilling out. Yeah, that's messed up.
- igorkraw 4y ago
  Well, he's also a Vietnam vet. So he has probably killed a lot more than two people, but the majority of it was state sanctioned if that makes you feel more at ease?
  - Mouthfeel 4y ago
    - Teever 4y ago
      That sometimes when we pick people at random to go fight and kill in some shitty war they come back fucked up and end up killing people stateside? Is this really so hard to understand? Like is the trope of the Vietnam vet with PTSD alien to you?
      - renewiltord 4y ago
        simoncion 4y ago
        > The fact that there's a bunch of killers there... Converting "One man who went to jail for killing (or maybe merely being involved with the killing of... the article doesn't make it clear) two people during a robbery forty-two years ago and was released early after fifteen years behind bars due to demonstrated good behavior, and has -as far as _we_ know- never killed (or been involved in the killing of) anyone since." into "there's a bunch of killers [in the TL]" is _definitely_ you getting your undergarments in a twist.
        renewiltord 4y ago
        Haha, have a nice night :)
- vaidhy 4y ago
  Why is that messed up? Do you feel the same about army vets? How about ones who have been dishonorably discharged? I would also be curious what you feel about Rambo, the movie? Do you identify with the sheriff or the vet?
  - renewiltord 4y ago
    I haven't watched Rambo. Well, I feel differently about army vets as a total population than civilian killers. But perhaps there is a difference to the way we perceive the world. I'll ask you a question in turn and tell you how I feel. Imagine there are two hypothetical groups of people. One is a group of people who will punch you for "looking at them funny". The other is every world heavyweight champion. The latter has punched more people in the head than the former. Is the second group (far more punching performed overall) or the first group more preferred by you to walk by at 1 AM at night? In the spirit of fairness, I will answer my question first. For me, I would actively avoid the first group and not be concerned by the second group.
    - simoncion 4y ago
      > ...I feel differently about army vets as a total population than civilian killers. How about military combat vets who were involved in killing in unspecified circumstances in the civilian world? > I haven't watched Rambo. You should. It's a good movie. The later ones (and most especially the most recent one) are dumb action movies, but the original is pretty good. > One is a group of people who will punch you for "looking at them funny". The other is every world heavyweight champion. I would trust the first group to act less erratically than the second. It's well-documented fact that getting hit in the head as much as boxers (and pro football players) do fucks you up, and makes you violent and erratic.
      - renewiltord 4y ago
        I guess we've got nothing left but to see whose life turns out better. You do your thing and I'll do mine and may the chips land where they do.
troutwine 4y ago
After serving 15 years in San Quentin. I get the feeling you’re sharing but what would you prefer? The article does not paint a particularly rosy view of this man’s life, nor does social security amount to much money, per the article.
- deepdriver 4y ago
  Side note on the money aspect: San Francisco spends approximately as much on homelessness per vagrant as it costs to house an inmate for the same length of time in San Quentin, where per-prisoner costs are also notoriously high. Inmates are ineligible to receive Social Security.
rendall 4y ago
He paid his debt to society and has a felony record. Now he's staying out of trouble. What more do you want? Guy's in a wheelchair. You want him to starve in the street?
- Mouthfeel 4y ago
  - simoncion 4y ago
    > Gets more in aid than some get paid in a month WORKING? From the article: > [Chavez is] barely getting by with his $1,100 monthly social security payments and subsidized housing in the Tenderloin. Unless the article is misrepresenting the source of the funds, his income is solely Social Security payouts. That's money that every living American is entitled to after they reach a certain age, or meet a few other eligibility requirements. Chavez already paid in to Social Security earlier in his life. Now he is receiving that money back, as promised by the Federal government. Unless your suggestion is to claw back that entitlement for folks who are convicted of felony manslaughter or murder charges, then his income is immaterial. _Is_ that your suggestion?
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - rendall 4y ago
    Keep in mind, the description was only "he committed a brutal robbery that left two men dead". That can include anything from "Chavez shot two men in order to steal from them" to "Two robbers were shot to death in the course of an attempted robbery while Chavez survived". But, let's take as granted the worst possible interpretation. Ok: you don't accept that his debt has been paid. What would you suggest? Honestly curious.
igorkraw 4y ago
Which is why justice and the judicial system is not really intended to facilitate revenge. Also, for the fullccontext >(...)serving in Vietnam when opposing soldiers ambushed and killed his commanding officer. Returning home to San Francisco at age 22 in the early 1970s, he can still recall how the trauma led to a burgeoning heroin addiction that he supported by shoplifting. He killed the 2 people in 79 and is now 70 years old and in a wheelchair. What would you propose to do with him instead? And are we denying that he could have benefited from assistance and intervention to deal with that trauma and reintegrate into society? Back to "fuck the vets"?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- refurb 4y ago
  You know what I’m going to tell God when I see him? I’m going to tell him I was framed.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
fmajid 4y ago
Yes, he’s clearly a far worse case than Napoleon Brown, London Breed’s brother who killed his own accomplice, not two innocents.

The subject of the article killed two men, and is now living on social security and subsidized housing. If I was family of the two killed men I would be furious.

rayiner 4y ago

renewiltord 4y ago

Woah, I've seen that dude by Leavenworth and GG Ave, I think. Damn, I walk around there casually not knowing there's dudes who have gone and killed multiple people just chilling out. Yeah, that's messed up.

igorkraw 4y ago
Well, he's also a Vietnam vet. So he has probably killed a lot more than two people, but the majority of it was state sanctioned if that makes you feel more at ease?
- Mouthfeel 4y ago
  - Teever 4y ago
    That sometimes when we pick people at random to go fight and kill in some shitty war they come back fucked up and end up killing people stateside? Is this really so hard to understand? Like is the trope of the Vietnam vet with PTSD alien to you?
    - renewiltord 4y ago
      - simoncion 4y ago
        > The fact that there's a bunch of killers there... Converting "One man who went to jail for killing (or maybe merely being involved with the killing of... the article doesn't make it clear) two people during a robbery forty-two years ago and was released early after fifteen years behind bars due to demonstrated good behavior, and has -as far as _we_ know- never killed (or been involved in the killing of) anyone since." into "there's a bunch of killers [in the TL]" is _definitely_ you getting your undergarments in a twist.
        renewiltord 4y ago
        Haha, have a nice night :)
vaidhy 4y ago
Why is that messed up? Do you feel the same about army vets? How about ones who have been dishonorably discharged? I would also be curious what you feel about Rambo, the movie? Do you identify with the sheriff or the vet?
- renewiltord 4y ago
  I haven't watched Rambo. Well, I feel differently about army vets as a total population than civilian killers. But perhaps there is a difference to the way we perceive the world. I'll ask you a question in turn and tell you how I feel. Imagine there are two hypothetical groups of people. One is a group of people who will punch you for "looking at them funny". The other is every world heavyweight champion. The latter has punched more people in the head than the former. Is the second group (far more punching performed overall) or the first group more preferred by you to walk by at 1 AM at night? In the spirit of fairness, I will answer my question first. For me, I would actively avoid the first group and not be concerned by the second group.
  - simoncion 4y ago
    > ...I feel differently about army vets as a total population than civilian killers. How about military combat vets who were involved in killing in unspecified circumstances in the civilian world? > I haven't watched Rambo. You should. It's a good movie. The later ones (and most especially the most recent one) are dumb action movies, but the original is pretty good. > One is a group of people who will punch you for "looking at them funny". The other is every world heavyweight champion. I would trust the first group to act less erratically than the second. It's well-documented fact that getting hit in the head as much as boxers (and pro football players) do fucks you up, and makes you violent and erratic.
    - renewiltord 4y ago
      I guess we've got nothing left but to see whose life turns out better. You do your thing and I'll do mine and may the chips land where they do.

troutwine 4y ago

After serving 15 years in San Quentin. I get the feeling you’re sharing but what would you prefer? The article does not paint a particularly rosy view of this man’s life, nor does social security amount to much money, per the article.

deepdriver 4y ago
Side note on the money aspect: San Francisco spends approximately as much on homelessness per vagrant as it costs to house an inmate for the same length of time in San Quentin, where per-prisoner costs are also notoriously high. Inmates are ineligible to receive Social Security.

rendall 4y ago

He paid his debt to society and has a felony record. Now he's staying out of trouble. What more do you want? Guy's in a wheelchair. You want him to starve in the street?

Mouthfeel 4y ago
- simoncion 4y ago
  > Gets more in aid than some get paid in a month WORKING? From the article: > [Chavez is] barely getting by with his $1,100 monthly social security payments and subsidized housing in the Tenderloin. Unless the article is misrepresenting the source of the funds, his income is solely Social Security payouts. That's money that every living American is entitled to after they reach a certain age, or meet a few other eligibility requirements. Chavez already paid in to Social Security earlier in his life. Now he is receiving that money back, as promised by the Federal government. Unless your suggestion is to claw back that entitlement for folks who are convicted of felony manslaughter or murder charges, then his income is immaterial. _Is_ that your suggestion?
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- rendall 4y ago
  Keep in mind, the description was only "he committed a brutal robbery that left two men dead". That can include anything from "Chavez shot two men in order to steal from them" to "Two robbers were shot to death in the course of an attempted robbery while Chavez survived". But, let's take as granted the worst possible interpretation. Ok: you don't accept that his debt has been paid. What would you suggest? Honestly curious.

igorkraw 4y ago

Which is why justice and the judicial system is not really intended to facilitate revenge. Also, for the fullccontext >(...)serving in Vietnam when opposing soldiers ambushed and killed his commanding officer. Returning home to San Francisco at age 22 in the early 1970s, he can still recall how the trauma led to a burgeoning heroin addiction that he supported by shoplifting. He killed the 2 people in 79 and is now 70 years old and in a wheelchair. What would you propose to do with him instead? And are we denying that he could have benefited from assistance and intervention to deal with that trauma and reintegrate into society? Back to "fuck the vets"?

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
refurb 4y ago
You know what I’m going to tell God when I see him? I’m going to tell him I was framed.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

fmajid 4y ago

Yes, he’s clearly a far worse case than Napoleon Brown, London Breed’s brother who killed his own accomplice, not two innocents.