do me proud nyc jury pool
How is shooting one dude terrorism?
he was rich
people liked it
That makes it populism, which is a threat to our Democracy
well it terrified me
He’s Italian. That counts as white.
deleted by creator
Looks like we know now
Maury voice “Italians… you are NOT WHITE”
crowd hollers
crackers dance badly while a man with a comically large moustache runs offstage crying
I’M NOT A CRACKKKA!
anti italian racism was retired too soon smh
Okay lemme understand it.
“Terrorism” is defined as using violent means to scare or suppress the population.
But what he did made the population happy.
So… shouldn’t it be considered that he provided a public service?
That is not the definition of terrorism.
Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups to further ideological goals stemming from domestic influences, such as those of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature
By that definition the entire federal government are terrorists lol
Park rangers are terrorists for telling me not to share my picnic baskets with the bears
Arguing in court the legal distinction between a picnic basket and a pic-ee-nic basket
Fred was never the same after Yogi’s ravishing rampage.
Yeah to be accurate the definition should probably spell out that this violent action comes from agents operating outside of a majority-backed monopoly on violence. Terrorist vs freedom fighter n all that.
Unfortunately implied by the “criminal” part of the definition
Violent, criminal acts
As the violence enacted by the state is supposedly supported by the laws they legislate, they get to skirt out of terrorism designation by being definitionally unable to commit “criminal” acts when they commit violent ones
Oh yeah good point.
Damn, if only we had some sort of international body that could bring charges against states for their terroristic crimes.
They made sure to make sure that it doesn’t apply to state actors. After 9/11, they felt they needed to come up with a definition of terrorism. They had a VERY hard time coming up with a definition that didn’t apply to themselves.
It gets worse, since it happened in the state of New York and this is its definition.
He OR SHE
Enbies stay winning
A very wide, very vague, very useful definition for a prosecutor.
so when cops murder black people that’s terrorism?
I am a jaywalker, and this is my manifesto. We will not obey the little green man. The red hand will not contain us.
Every step we take is a middle finger to your order, a crack in your illusion of control. We disrupt your flow, we shatter your calm, and we dare your machines to stop us. Your brakes screech, your tempers flare, and your systems falter—all because we walked.
You call it unsafe. We call it liberation. You call it reckless. We call it revolution.
We are the chaos in your commute, the stress in your steering wheel, and the violence in your precious order.
We are jaywalkers. Your streets will never be safe again.
Lol so if you punch a klansman that’s terrorism?
Curious, that describes health insurance companies. As well as various parties decrying the killing of the CEO.
If we’re being incredibly pedantic (not saying you are) then that also isn’t the definition in the state of New York
This is the definition of terrorism in the state of new yorks penal law
From this terrible overdesigned website https://criminaldefense.1800nynylaw.com/ny-penal-law-490-25-crime-of-terrorism.html
I suspect the prosecutor will try to argue that Luigi attempted to effect a societal change in some way and therefore it’s terrorism.
edit: what if they charged him with treason?
So, does this mean that hate crimes count as terrorism?
Only if it’s against the rich or the white
Hate crimes are the norm, so no it wouldn’t change anything
I hate that I typed that
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, …
1.- Does he owe allegiance to the United States? How is that even defined? I don’t see how “adoctrinating children to the pledge of alliance” counts, since it’s, well, indoctrination, not allegiance.
2.- Did he levy war against them? To my understatement, he is not a sovereign representative and even if such he has not filed a declaration of war.
3.- If not, what enemy of the US did he adhere to? The only reasonable interpretarion I can see here is that he adhered to The People, and thus legally the US State considers The People of the US an enemy.
1.- Does he owe allegiance to the United States? How is that even defined? I don’t see how “adoctrinating children to the pledge of alliance” counts, since it’s, well, indoctrination, not allegiance.
Selective Service Act (which he probably did sign up with given men are supposed to when they turn 18, for FASFA and whatnot)I mean also not to mention the fact he’s a citizen - and if a citizen can be (and has been in the past) charged with treason which also uses that language, the argument that ‘I don’t owe allegiance to the US’ kinda falls apart:
Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
Wall to wall coverage over a ghoul being rightfully merked+ an expedited terrorist charge
School shooting yesterday and it’s already old news
The bourgeois keep showing us who are they are and we never learn
Not to mention the ongoing genocide they’re completely ignoring.
The only thing keeping Madison’s shooting relevant is this time the shooter’s not a man so people are doing a victory lap in agendaposting.
I’m joining the war on terror
that would suggest the rich people are feeling terrorised rn
silver linings i guess
well i hope the jury have been fucked over by health insurance
They will almost certainly ask them questions about biases regarding health insurance during jury selection and somehow manage to find 12 law-loving, boot-licking people who’ve never been screwed over by insurance, don’t have any negative feelings towards insurance companies because of someone they know being screwed over. I mean it would really be as simple as finding a dozen retired boomers who held union jobs with good benefits all their lives, are retired on cushy amounts of retirement funds, and are absolutely law and order freaks.
Defense attorney would have to be the worst of all time to somehow not be able to get one person fucked over by health insurance on a full panel.
He’s going down. He’s going to be convicted. The American legal system serves the bourgeoisie. Impartiality of a jury means not prejudiced against or FOR the perpetrator so they can absolutely get people struck for holding unorthodox opinions and not being totally certain of being able to rule on the facts of the charges without prejudice to any feelings they may have for the victim or defendant and their motives.
At the end you’ll probably have some juror anonymously speak to the papers, say they sympathized because they know someone who was fucked over by insurance BUUUT they can’t justify murder and they weren’t asked to rule on whether the defendant’s actions were morally right or wrong but whether they amounted to murder and that they had to find them guilty as a result of the evidence. No one is going to do jury nullification on this, no one but extremely online leftists, judges, and prosecutors know what that even is and most Americans are the most obedient little piggies who will believe the judge when they instruct them they have to rule on the facts of the charges not their opinions. You can bet if someone tries to do jury nullification the judge will grill the fuck out of them, really, really pressure them in a case like this and most people who got that far would crumble and with some grumbling go along with voting guilty at last.
Terrorism charge is just kind of make an example out of him type of thing, good chance they can’t make that stick if he has a good legal team but they want to send a message that the state will hit anyone with the full book who dares to do something like this and not everyone will have the types of lawyers to beat such charges.
The prosecution is gonna go ahead with the “south park attack” wherein they point out that all murders are terroism since some people will be terrorized.
i hope the jury have been fucked over by health insurance
They’ll be American, so the odds will be good
*commits second degree homicidenyc:
is this terrorism?NYC couldn’t spot terrorism if it crashed straight into a buulding.
That’s why they needed the second one.
The third one just did that on its own
Nothing to see there
Forth one. Side of barn clearly removed. Cock weather vane still erect.
Why 2nd and not first?
it’s like first but you actually have a good reason
I thought 1st was premeditated, 2nd was heat of the moment, manslaughter is all flavors of “your honor I made a mistake”, and negligent homicide is when you failed to prevent their death
it’s state by state and i’m not a lawyer. pretty sure second in ny can included premeditated but prompted by harm
This is anti-Italian discrimination
critical support to America?
Never
awkwardly stands trying to block the wikipedia article about the Years of Lead
An Italian would never.
edit: woah that article’s
Belligerentssection is amazing. It even shouts out Gladio.
They charged a white guy with terrorism? He’s gonna walk.
“Get out of here, kid. Go be a Family Guy”
Critical support to the NY DA in intentionally sandbagging the prosecution to let the CEO slayer off
What does “sandbagging” mean in this context? I’ve never heard that before
Sand bagging is a term which refers to intentionally doing bad so your team loses. It’s often used in sports or games to describe intentionally losing
in martial arts it means intentionally keeping your belt ranking low so you can easily win competitions
Ah that makes sense. I wonder if the meaning is the same in other sports and I just wasn’t aware of the nuance
All I'm saying is that terrorists are a lot browner than this kidCNN was just on before gnashing their teeth at social media having solidarity with Luigi, 5 steps away from yelling out “I am Brian Thompson!”
Does this mean he’ll be tried as an “enemy combatant” with no rights instead of a criminal?
Legally, no. But given the circumstances, who knows what they’ll try.
Sent to gitmo for indefinite detention with no trial.
Terrorism is a weird way to say self defence
Really showing their cards on this one.
