Pong Messiah Posted October 2, 2014 Share Posted October 2, 2014 In California, if you kill somebody, you can no longer get a reduced sentence if you murdered them in a panic after discovering they are gay or transgender. Ridiculous this even needs to be a law, but if people are/were actually using "gay/trans-panic" to get reduced sentences, you gotta do what you gotta do. California's level of suckage is still only surpassed by Texas, but credit where it is due. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Odine Posted October 2, 2014 Share Posted October 2, 2014 That this is even a THING... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 2, 2014 Share Posted October 2, 2014 They should stop taking frame of mind into account period. Is someone less dead because you think Bruce Lee lives in your vagina and told you to kill that guy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burt Posted October 2, 2014 Share Posted October 2, 2014 Progress isn't as rewarding when it starts from such a low baseline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerina Posted October 2, 2014 Share Posted October 2, 2014 People will always use any excuse available to them to get out of a murder charge. This one will just be replaced with something else equally as repulsive in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pong Messiah Posted October 2, 2014 Author Share Posted October 2, 2014 They should stop taking frame of mind into account period. Is someone less dead because you think Bruce Lee lives in your vagina and told you to kill that guy?I dunno. That father who beat to death a man who was molesting his daughter... could he still avoid murder charges in Fozzieworld? If not, I don't wanna live in that world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkeygirl Posted October 2, 2014 Share Posted October 2, 2014 OOO! Is there a roller coaster in Fozzieworld? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pong Messiah Posted October 2, 2014 Author Share Posted October 2, 2014 Yeah, but you're not tall enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cerina Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 They should stop taking frame of mind into account period. Is someone less dead because you think Bruce Lee lives in your vagina and told you to kill that guy?I dunno. That father who beat to death a man who was molesting his daughter... could he still avoid murder charges in Fozzieworld? If not, I don't wanna live in that world. Go Texas! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ms. Spam Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 Texas is awesome. Fools. Also I believe California is officially banning plastic bags too. I guess it could be worse. We could all live in Indonesia where a woman gave birth to a lizard and is being accused of witchcraft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 In Fozzieworld, defense is still relevant. Crazy/upset/drunk is not.Heck, in Fozzieworld that guy gets a reward.And that woman is a witch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Odine Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 Does everyone talk in the third person in fozzieworld too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 Only royalty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Copper Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 fuck you Desslok! California is awesome! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kurgan Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 In California, if you kill somebody, you can no longer get a reduced sentence if you murdered them in a panic after discovering they are gay or transgender. Ridiculous this even needs to be a law, but if people are/were actually using "gay/trans-panic" to get reduced sentences, you gotta do what you gotta do. California's level of suckage is still only surpassed by Texas, but credit where it is due.What about the Twinkie Defense? Can you still use that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carrie Mathison Posted October 3, 2014 Share Posted October 3, 2014 Poorly written article. It is unclear if the legislation removes the 'panic' defense completely, or just when used as a reaction to discomfort with homosexuals. The second paragraph says its the former; the fifth paragraph says it's the latter. If the latter, I have no real issue with that. If it's the former, then this is terrible legislation, since it basically turns all voluntary manslaughter (i.e. 3rd degree murder) into 2nd degree murder. They should stop taking frame of mind into account period. Is someone less dead because you think Bruce Lee lives in your vagina and told you to kill that guy? Silly idea. The concept of mens rea is the entire underpinning of the criminal justice system and the philosophical justification for why a crime can be punished by the state. If you remove the concept of criminal intent, then you are basically saying all crimes should be treated as statutory rape or traffic tickets, which is an uncommonly stupid idea. I think what you really meant to say is you want to restrict the insanity defense, which is already done to a large degree (wiki the Insanity Defense Reform Act of 1984). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest El Chalupacabra Posted October 5, 2014 Share Posted October 5, 2014 CM, it appears the site, www.advocate.com is a LGBT-themed news site. So, between that, and the fact that the subheading of the article was "In a groundbreaking move, the state takes a stand against defendants being able to use a victim's sexual orientation or gender identity as justification for murder," I think its safe to assume the article is referring to panic defense used in cases where homosexuals were assaulted, and the perpetrator claims he or she assaulted the victim because the perpetrator flew into some uncontrollable rage because they found out the victim was homosexual. I think its possible that because a certain audience is assumed by the writer of the article, the use of quotes around panic in the second paragraph, implies the meaning of gay panic, and the reader is supposed to already know that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evolence Posted October 5, 2014 Share Posted October 5, 2014 My liking your post was due to mens rea comments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 6, 2014 Share Posted October 6, 2014 Poorly written article. It is unclear if the legislation removes the 'panic' defense completely, or just when used as a reaction to discomfort with homosexuals. The second paragraph says its the former; the fifth paragraph says it's the latter. If the latter, I have no real issue with that. If it's the former, then this is terrible legislation, since it basically turns all voluntary manslaughter (i.e. 3rd degree murder) into 2nd degree murder. They should stop taking frame of mind into account period. Is someone less dead because you think Bruce Lee lives in your vagina and told you to kill that guy?Silly idea. The concept of mens rea is the entire underpinning of the criminal justice system and the philosophical justification for why a crime can be punished by the state. If you remove the concept of criminal intent, then you are basically saying all crimes should be treated as statutory rape or traffic tickets, which is an uncommonly stupid idea. I think what you really meant to say is you want to restrict the insanity defense, which is already done to a large degree (wiki the Insanity Defense Reform Act of 1984). I probably have the best understanding of the law of any non-attorney on Nightly, due to my job. 95% of my job is basically interpreting and explaining insurance policies, determining liability and applying state and local ordinances. So trust me when I say, that was my point. I knew at least someone would pick up on it. I think that this is an overreaching "feel good" legislation that will have unintended consequences. California has a history of not fully thinking things through (Three Strikes?) and then eventually realizing that it was a mistake. My biggest problem is, also, the "in part" portion. For example, there was recently a father in Florida(?) who beat a man almost to death because he was raping the man's son. The father wasn't prosecuted at all, to the best of my knowledge, but you could definitely make an argument that he is at least, in part, beating the man because he discovered his sexual orientation as a homosexual. (If I remember correctly, the man was both a practicing homosexual and a child rapist. I could be wrong.) It's overly broad, to the point of being meaningless. But that describes a lot of what California does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pong Messiah Posted October 6, 2014 Author Share Posted October 6, 2014 the man was both a practicing homosexualOffensive. Nobody needs to "practice" being homosexual, any more than they need practice being hetero. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Krawlie Posted October 6, 2014 Share Posted October 6, 2014 I don't know. I'd imagine you probably need to practice in order to make it fit comfortably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ms. Spam Posted October 6, 2014 Share Posted October 6, 2014 If sex was called practice... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pong Messiah Posted October 6, 2014 Author Share Posted October 6, 2014 I don't know. I'd imagine you probably need to practice in order to make it fit comfortably.OMG PERV ALERT THAT'S NOT WHAT I MEANT But yeah, you're right. Depending on the persons involved at least. But it goes the same for hetero sex. Let's avoid discrimination in the Lyceum. Thx! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tex Posted October 6, 2014 Share Posted October 6, 2014 On the topic of weird sex laws: http://observationdeck.io9.com/the-complete-list-of-weird-sex-laws-in-the-u-s-a-1485048155 Gotta think most of these are BS, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evolence Posted October 7, 2014 Share Posted October 7, 2014 Krawlie, that's what butt plugs are for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts