• 0 Posts
  • 14 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 24th, 2023

help-circle
  • You don’t accept it, because that’s bullshit. You also don’t accept that it’s somehow your fault that society (and your employer) is okay with that kind of injustice.

    I think there are two sane choices, you named one that’s really a good idea cause you do not have to take that shit.

    The other one would be sharing this situation with other nurses, forming a union or joining one, and going on strike. Letting the hospital see how well it functions when only those lazy doctors doing 1% of the necessary work and getting 2 thirds of the cake show up.



  • The thing is the motion to be tried as an adult comes before the trial, so it comes before you ascertain anything about motivations, intent, psychological expertise…

    I think this whole thing goes with the whole drinking, enlisting in the army, voting… You guys have a legal definition of childhood that’s way fuzzier that I’m used to. In my head, a motivation isn’t mature or not intrinsically, it’s mature or not depending on who has it : if it’s a child it’s not, if it’s an adult it should be so it’s considered as such.

    I guess having a hard limit on the eighteenth birthday is weird in its own right… Maybe it’s because I’m old but in my head it should be fuzzy in the other direction: 18 year olds are definitely still kids in most aspects and should get a chance to be tried as children.



  • Why though ? They’re not an adult, and rape is depressingly common in children.

    Edit: maybe instead I should focus on the core absurdity of it all: isn’t saying “a 17 year old rapist should be tried as an adult” the same as saying “the laws concerning rape in children 17 and above should be the same as the laws concerning adult rapists”?

    Because in this second case you ensure that all children be given the same rights under the law and you get the same severity for 17 year olds for crimes you decide warrant it, rather than a shoddy “hmmm I think this crime is heinous enough to preemptively strip this person from their rights before we even decide on guilt and stuff and maybe the judge will agree”.


  • Alright I can see how culturally you end up going in that direction.

    Still, though, I can’t fathom someone being smart enough to go through all that education to become a state prosecutor, then seeing a terrible story about a kid have access to a gun when they clearly shouldn’t and killing their own mother through sheer childish stupidity and then coming to the conclusion that “you know what would reestablish justice in this situation? Injecting poison into that kid and watching him die.”

    Who’s that person? What happened in their life to make them think like that?