The most current loss of my faith in humanity

[Khainiwest]

I admit my emotional argument was illogical and wrong. So what? I offered my proper argument to eclipse after that, which all of you decided to ignore and instead spend pages insulting me. It's funny how I'm called a child when insulting itself is not a mature action.

There is no proper argument, no one was arguing statistics e_e. I don't know why you can't follow, the fact you tried to use those statistics, which are not a reliable nor fair form of evidence to justify your assumption of the general morality of that subculture, is the problem, not the litteral facts.

And again with your generalizations, where exactly did I insult you, or ignore your argument? I pointed it out what you actually said, not what I interpretted.

Now, I'm not denying that I was serious. But how naive do you people have to be to think that I'm a perfectly rational creature who always makes rational unemotional statements? I'm not a robot, I'm a human.

Own up to your mistakes and stop trying to deflect and believe that everyone is just misinterpretting you. It's quite unfair to blame everyone else for not understanding you, when not in any of your posts, up until now, have you not tried to clarify your circumstances, simply tried to bounce from it.

Does it make me a liar to get emotional and then offer a rational argument after being notified that my argument is wrong? Of course not. All it does is show that my original statements were wrong--I established that once I gave eclipse my real argument.

...Your original argument being "based on these statistics, it's more likely this is not an emotional but a genuine immoral issue with the south.". Stated on the very last page for crying out loud. And yes that is summarizing it, but if you want me to quote it, I can take your exact words.

I'm pushing the point that she's more likely to mean it.

Just to save us both time of you screaming "strawman" and running off as if that's a suitable response.

Edited March 27, 2013 by Khainiwest

[Tangerine]

Okay guys, I let it continue for a little bit hoping it'd sort itself out after a day, but it clearly is not going to. I suggest you make a new thread in SD if you want to continue this discussion, or invite eachother to a PM and you can have a group discussion there.

Thanks.

[Knife]

I highly doubt this was racially motivated. The perpetrators probably went to a nice area and picked out the person they figured would put up the least amount of resistance. That alone is bad enough. I can't believe someone would shoot a baby in the face.

Can the smaller boy be punished as badly as the bigger one though? In the article the mother says the larger one was the one who was the aggressor and the one who did the shooting. It seems more like the smaller one was just... there. He sounds more like an accessory than an accomplice.

"A boy approached me and told me he wanted my money, and I told him I didn't have any money. And he said, 'Give me your money or I'm going to kill you and I'm going to shoot your baby and kill your baby,' and I said, 'I don't have any money,' and 'Don't kill my baby.'"

The boy tried to grab her purse and opened fire when she said tried to tell him she had no money, West said, with the shot grazing her head. She said the boy then shot her in the leg.

West continued, "And then, all of a sudden, he walked over and he shot my baby in the face."

During the incident, the smaller of the two boys was hiding behind the larger one, she said. "I don't know whether it was his brother or a friend."

I'm guessing the larger one was the 17 year old and the smaller one was the 14 year old. It's possible that the younger one was manipulated into going there, not realizing the full extent of what was going to occur.

Hmm, but right afterwards it seems to contradict what was just said...

West had said she hopes the boys will receive the maximum sentence possible. "If they can use a gun like an adult, then they can be charged like an adult," she said. "I want to see lethal injection or at least life in prison. This child did nothing to him. He was innocent and helpless."

Earlier in the article she mentions that it was the larger boy who used the gun, and now it sounds like she's saying both of them wielded it. Then the quote following it uses a singular pronoun ("him") obviously referring to the one who fired the gun. Which is it? If both are being hit with a murder charge then the younger boy must have done something other than just stand there, right (this isn't a rhetorical question; I'd like an answer from someone more learned on the subject of law)?

I'm more worried about the mother than the criminals though. The woman has my deepest condolences. I don't think she can ever recover from this. She even tried to perform CPR on her child after he getting shot. That's likely just as traumatizing as witnessing the shooting, probably even moreso. I hope she doesn't blame herself for an act that was completely out of her hands and I also hope she gets all the help she needs...

Objection!

[PresidentEden]

Objection!

Er... really? While your point is understood, I think you're nitpicking a bit much. Should the shooter and his accomplice be involved, the prosecutors will sort through it.

And it's definitely economically efficient for both to have a gun, guns are good investments for robbers (since that's the main tool for their chosen source of income), much like it's more efficient for two miners to have their own pickax; just because they weren't used here doesn't mean they wouldn't be used ever. That's an aside though, the main potential issue you raise is punishing two people as killers when definitionally there was only one, and I'm reasonably certain it will be handled.

[Phoenix Wright]

I am not prejudiced against Southerners. I think all Americans have poor values, but Southerners more so.

Why do you want people to take you seriously when you say things like this?

[Liz]

i was going to make a statement about Southerners, but since I'm Hispanic, I obviously don't qualify. Sorry guys, I guess I'm just not part of the southern demographic

[eclipse]

Okay guys, I let it continue for a little bit hoping it'd sort itself out after a day, but it clearly is not going to. I suggest you make a new thread in SD if you want to continue this discussion, or invite eachother to a PM and you can have a group discussion there.

Thanks.

Thanks~! Also, if you think I've been out-of-line, do let me know~!

(since I see some objection in-thread)

[Knife]

Er... really? While your point is understood, I think you're nitpicking a bit much. Should the shooter and his accomplice be involved, the prosecutors will sort through it.

And it's definitely economically efficient for both to have a gun, guns are good investments for robbers (since that's the main tool for their chosen source of income), much like it's more efficient for two miners to have their own pickax; just because they weren't used here doesn't mean they wouldn't be used ever. That's an aside though, the main potential issue you raise is punishing two people as killers when definitionally there was only one, and I'm reasonably certain it will be handled.

Objection!

Thanks~! Also, if you think I've been out-of-line, do let me know~!

(since I see some objection in-thread)

Order!

[PresidentEden]

Knife, you're assuming a lot there without any actual evidence of the sort. Put simply, you cannot possibly prove based on what we currently know that the younger of the two was simply tagging along. We don't even know who the two are yet, so we have no reason to assume one is an older brother or role model. Should all of that information come to light, then as I said, that will be sorted out in court (or should) -- but you're supplying information that simply cannot be necessarily concluded and then rendering judgment based on that unsubstantiated info.

[Rapier]

Studies show that a vast majority of Southern people do support the death penalty. I've already proven my point, so I don't get how I'm wrong? Stereotypes do exist.

Real facts show that a vast majority of Southern countries do not have death penalty. Also, we brazilians do not support it too, and you may recall that we're the biggest and more populous country in South America. Your stereotype is wrong.

@Knife

How can you say this? Just let Edgeworth investigate the case properly. Also, we don't know if the tag-along has participated in other crimes in the past. So, a full investigation is in order.

Edited March 31, 2013 by Rapier

[redturtle806]

Real facts show that a vast majority of Southern countries do not have death penalty. Also, we brazilians do not support it too, and you may recall that we're the biggest and more populous country in South America. Your stereotype is wrong.

I think he's referring to the Southern demographic of the United States, not actual South American countries. It tends to have slightly different laws/values than the Northern or Western Coast regions.

But yeah his sterotypes are wrong, and certainly doesn't apply in more liberal cities like Austin.

[Rapier]

Well then, omit what I said since I know very little about the demographic of the United States.

[Narga_Rocks]

I think he's referring to the Southern demographic of the United States, not actual South American countries. It tends to have slightly different laws/values than the Northern or Western Coast regions.

But yeah his sterotypes are wrong, and certainly doesn't apply in more liberal cities like Austin.

Have you seen all the weather maps on US channels? If you are in Texas I'd assume so. There is no South America.

Anyway, @Rapier, yeah, from any American if they say "the South" they aren't talking about anything in the southern hemisphere as it doesn't exist. "The south" is the states like Texas and Louisiana and Arizona and stuff.

[redturtle806]

What is this South America you speak of? Do you mean Mexico? :P

[PresidentEden]

"The South" within the US consists of the states of Florida, Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, and Louisiana. Some will include West Virginia and Missouri based on some climatological and historical similarities (especially West Virginia), but geographically and (in the case of Missouri) culturally they don't fit.

A lot of people include Texas and Oklahoma and I suppose I can't say they're wrong, but I've always regarded Texas as its own distinct thing (it's too Southwestern to be purely South but too Southern to be purely Southwestern) and Oklahoma as a Southwest-Midwest-South crossroads.