JohnHwagi

JohnHwagi t1_iyf89id wrote

I’m not sure I agree with the assertion that psychological treatment is not able to significantly reduce the chance of someone engaging in a mass shooting.

While people that shoot others are unlikely to seek treatment themselves, it should be forced upon people who commit violent crimes. Many shooters have massive red flags that should have led to arrest and psychological treatment prior to the shooting.

5

JohnHwagi t1_iy8m6n5 wrote

The state department says that so people do less stupid shit. They generally still work to help Americans that are arrested for stuff that’s not a major crime in the US. This dude will probably just be held for a day or two and then deported by Qatar if he is American; the US has more military in Qatar than Qatar, and is most of the reason Qatar is still around.

9

JohnHwagi t1_ixwkp7q wrote

Yeah, but the idea of whether someone has been charged or not is meaningless in determining their guilt within common law systems. The accusation itself and the denial is the only relevant part currently. Whether there are additional accusers or a way to corroborate this accusation will be used to determine his guilt at trial. The fact that he was charged is explicitly ignored as evidence for obvious reasons.

On the topic of prosecutors being general fuckups, Bill Cosby was not charged during multiple investigations before he was first brought to trial. Ray Rice punched a woman in an elevator on a recoding that prosecutors had, and they did not press charges until public outcry forced them to much later. Given that these decisions are often so obviously wrong, in favor of and against defendants, we should not give the decisions made at these offices credence.

4

JohnHwagi t1_ixwhxhz wrote

I’ve not claimed this actor is innocent nor guilty, nor made any comments about that specific attorney. These comments apply to the common law justice systems as a whole.

District and defense attorneys are adversarial figures, and should always be viewed with distrust due to their goals. Neither a DA nor a defense attorney is inherently interested in “justice”. They’re interested in winning their case, and only by putting those two interests against each other do we have enough information for a decision to be made by an impartial third party (the jury).

6

JohnHwagi t1_ivhr330 wrote

Reuters is a wire service, like AP. They release most any news without selectivity and with very fact-based headlines. Other news services selectively use their articles with minor revisions on a paid basis according to their leadership. As an example, you will often see “via Reuters” or “via AP” on CNN articles.

6

JohnHwagi t1_iuz38uo wrote

You have the right to defend yourself from someone shooting at you, even if you are a minority in an area with gang violence. We cannot apply laws differently to suburbanites and to “people that look like they’re in a gang”.

There is no legal basis to charge someone who uses violence only after they are attacked unless you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt they did not have a legal justification to use force.

7