Holy long discussion gods am I late to this party! Blasted time zones.
Nolonger, I perfectly understand the basis of your thoughts: finding humor where humor does not normally belong. I think most of us subscribe to that at one point or another.
But I think what is happening here is that you are young and naive. Don't misunderstand, this is not an attack on you or your character; it is just simple fact. I doubt you have had much experience with death or near-death. And I'm not talking about an old grandmother reaching the end of a long life; I'm talking about someone who is very close to you having their life violently cut short, or at least coming very close. I have seen lives violently ended before, and I've seen the pain in their family's eyes. It's a sight that always stays with me, and it drives me to enjoy life.
I also understand what you are trying to say about this guy, how he needs to move on and not dwell on the past. I agree with the thought in theory, but not how you describe it in practice. Two weeks seems like a long time in youth, but as you get older you realize two weeks is nothing more than a blip. If you are an empathetic person, trust me on this one, it will take you years to fully get over something like that, and that is ONLY if the victim in question has no long term injuries.
But what this person did is not get over it. He made a mockery of it. If I were the brother or friend of the person he injured in the car, I would have beat the shit out of him. And I don't mean that figuratively, I mean that literally. I would have come at him with a baseball bat and beat him into a bloody submission until he got so scared or so weak that he shit himself.
Once you have seen the specter of death looming over someone you love, you will understand what I'm telling you.
EDIT: I had reread in depth what was posted earlier, and I had a few more comments to add:
Let's make a hypothetical here. Let's say I was this guy. I for whatever impossible reason got really drunk and got in a DUI accident and hospitalized a girl. Common empathy dictates the following:
1. I realize that I did something incredibly stupid, and I go to great lengths to ensure it never happens again. I go to some form of rehab, learning to drink responsibly, etc.
2. I sure as hell don't drink for a long time, to get my thoughts and emotions in order.
3. I do whatever I can to make sure the family knows I'm sorry. I pay for as much of the medical bills as I can. I visit every day to bring flowers, gifts, whatever. If the family doesn't want me near them, then I at least stop by daily to leave something for the victim for them to deliver.
4. If I woke up after a week like you said and realized I was dead inside and stopped caring, I would at least have the foresight to know "oh shit my sentencing is coming up sometime soon I should at least pretend to be remorseful! I can skip the party next weekend and tell the judge about my choice, because that might help me not go to jail!"
As for your earlier comment about if a friend's mom died, I have to strongly disagree with that. Behemoth and I have a good friend whose mom died, and it pretty much ruined our fucking days.
Are the supporters of the sentence saying that this man's photo is evidence of sociopathic qualities?
Are the supporters of the sentence saying that this man's photo shows contempt for the court, and that such contempt requires additional jail time?
Well then lock me up and throw away the key.
What's the purpose of punishment? Rehabilitate a single prisoner? Send a message to those who would possibly commit the crime in the future? Or do we punish criminals because it makes us feel good to do so?
Someone correct me, but I think that a conviction gives you a standard for a sentence. Drunk driving probably requires some jail time.
BUT
A judge is allowed to show leniency if he feels it is necessary. Someone who is literally sick and vomiting at the prospect of going to jail for the only mistake he ever made in his entire life is going to be seen differently than the guy who rolls his eyes and says "I'm sooooorrry, it won't happen again," like a kid who is forced by his parents to apologize.
If you drink, drive, and seriously hurt someone, you normally go to jail. Probation is more of a test and a prize. It's a test to see if you can earn it, and it's a prize in that you get that INSTEAD of going to jail.
The facebook guy obviously failed the test. He failed because he didn't show remorse outside of the court. He didn't get punished worse or unfairly for his actions. He just got the standard, normal punishment.
I'd even be inclined to sentence him harshly if the picture was of him just at a party having a good time, even without the costume - which is just bitter icing on the cake.
It's like Jake just has this vindictive, totalitarian personality. I have this image in my head of him in a judge's gown, pounding his gavel on the desk, sentencing jaywalkers to ten years in maximum security if they even slightly resemble the dudes who beat him up in high school.
Well I understand what Jake was saying-- I'm assuming that after reading this article, we're thinking of what our reaction would be if we were the drunk driver, and how differently this guy is taking it. I'm going to speak for myself, but I'm pretty sure most people (meaning those in this argument) would agree with me: I think that if I were in this situation, I would be absolutely devastated about hurting someone in a drunk driving accident. I personally would feel so horrible that I would feel guilty to have ANY fun, and wouldn't think of making any fun related to the crash or sentence (relating to Jake's comment about throwing the guy in jail WITHOUT the costume). I personally would be thinking more along the lines of "Shit, that was so stupid, this is going to stay with me for the rest of my life, job interviewers are going to look at this and hire the other guy over me, I nearly killed this innocent driver, people are going to lose respect for me when they find out about this, I can't just forget about this and move on because I might wind up in JAIL, what's going to happen to my education, how are friends and family going to react when they hear about my mistake, why am I so stupid, haven't people been warning me about this for most of my life..?"
And the list could go on. Two weeks is not enough time to sort through these thoughts, unless you didn't have them to begin with. THAT is why I agree with sending him to jail, and why I don't think that he was remorseful.
I also agree with Ryan's comment about even if he DID honestly feel bad about it, but just for like a week-- if that were to happen, I also think he should have just pretended. The disrespect for the victim and family comes into play there.
I also think he should have just pretended. The disrespect for the victim and family comes into play there.
Pretending to feel bad is more disrespectful than not feeling bad. Not feeling bad isn't disrespectful so much as it's apathetic.
Were I in that man's situation, I could totally see myself going to a party within two weeks. Being remorseful is normal, but don't think that remorse and partying are mutually exclusive. Some people deal with grief in their own ways.
How long does everybody think is an appropriate time to wait after injuring somebody before getting on with your life?
By "getting on with your life", do you mean "wearing a prisoner costume and in doing so make light of your predicament during a period of time where you are being evaluated on the basis of your character and remorse"? He could have maybe held off on the jokes until after the trial was over.
That, and pretended. Not pretending may be more honest, but it sure doesn't make anyone feel better. Pretending will at least give the victim and their family some peace of mind, and maybe get you a lighter sentence. While I don't think it's the best thing to do in any situation... I dunno, I still think it's better than blatantly doing something like that.
Let me get this straight among you folks, though: I totally think this guy was being an asshole. The beef I have is the deeper meaning I'm getting out of some of your posts: that to have fun two weeks after injuring somebody is in some way morally reprehensible, as if the only decent thing to do would have been to join a monastery. Please note that just like my mental image of Jake with a gavel, I'm picturing a few of you kneeling in the pews at a catholic church while praying to God to smite anybody who ever laughs at any point in their life after stepping on somebody's heel.
No, honestly, that's the mental picture I'm painting.
To reiterate: I think this particular guy was an asshole. The thing I'm worried about now is ever telling any of you folks that I made a mistake in my life lest you think I'm a douchebag if I don't apologize for it every waking moment of my life.
Mostly for me, I just have issues with the guy making a mockery of it.
I had said earlier that if it were me, I wouldn't have gone to the party. But to each his own; while I think it would be more or less irresponsible to do so, people also need to find some normalcy in their lives.
But, as stated before, he made a mockery of it. He had hurt a family and decided it funny. Not only that, he was stupid enough to get caught by posting pictures of his misadventures on Facebook. And he got caught. And he got his normal drunk driving punishment for something of that severity. I was satisfied that probation was not given to someone in my eyes had not earned it, as stated in my last post.
Let me get this straight among you folks, though: I totally think this guy was being an asshole. The beef I have is the deeper meaning I'm getting out of some of your posts: that to have fun two weeks after injuring somebody is in some way morally reprehensible, as if the only decent thing to do would have been to join a monastery. Please note that just like my mental image of Jake with a gavel, I'm picturing a few of you kneeling in the pews at a catholic church while praying to God to smite anybody who ever laughs at any point in their life after stepping on somebody's heel.
Alright, John, you got me there. I suppose being inclined to increase his sentence just because he went to a party is unreasonable. However, this is a moot point since he went above and beyond the call of duty with that damn costume.
I have no problem with someone having fun. But this was a very small window of time where he was being evaluated specifically for how much of a douche he is, and he displayed his true colors in an ideal setting for the prosecutor to make a case against him.
Is everyone having a problem with punishment that is based on someone's character? Is that what we're getting down to? Because I'm pretty sure that's an inherent aspect of our legal system. You get punished for committing a crime, and sentencing (and the original verdict, for that matter) can be more lenient if you show remorse for your crimes and a desire to prevent reoccurrence of the situation.
Of course, remorse also shows guilt, so if you're trying to make a case against guilt, remorse may not be the best way to go. But when it comes down to sentencing, douches do far worse than saints.
(CNN) -- A New Zealand judge has made a 9-year-old girl a ward of the court so that her name can be changed from Talula Does the Hula From Hawaii, the country's national news agency reported Thursday.
Family Court Judge Rob Murfitt listed a series of unusual names that New Zealand parents had given their children, and said he was concerned that such strange monikers would create hurdles for them as they grew up.
"It makes a fool of the child and sets her up with a social disability and handicap," the New Zealand Press Association quoted the judge as saying.
Among the names Murfitt cited: twins named Benson and Hedges -- after a brand of cigarettes; Violence; and Number 16 Bus Shelter.
Some parents had named children after six-cylinder Ford cars, the news agency reported.
The Registrar General of Births, Deaths and Marriages said in a statement that it had rejected names including Fish and Chips, Yeah Detroit, Stallion, Twisty Poi -- a staple food in Polynesian cuisine -- and Sex Fruit.
A lawyer for Talula Does the Hula From Hawaii said the girl is so embarrassed by her name that friends know her as "K."
Last month, an judge in the U.S. state of Illinois allowed a school bus driver to legally change his first name to "In God" and his last name to "We Trust."
But an appeals court in the state of New Mexico ruled against a man -- named Variable -- who wanted to change his name to a two-word phrase that contains a four-letter expletive and expresses opposition to censorship.
Regarding Variable's desired name, I'm gonna take a shot in the dark... "Fuck Censorship"?
Is it bad that I think some of these names are totally awesome?
Here in Ecuador is not uncommon for people (generally out in the country, not so much in cities) to name their kids whatever crosses their minds. A national magazine once held a contest for the weirdest names, and the winner received cash money and a free name change. Among the contestants were: Toyota Land Cruiser, Dos a Uno (Two to One, in reference to a soccer match), Tapa de Cola (Cola BottleCap), and others. The winner was this guy called "Semen de los Dioses", that is Semen of the Gods.
okay - not sure if this is the best place for this, but it's as good as any -
So it is sad that I saw this -
Hole in Jet Forces Emergency Landing
MANILA, Philippines (July 25) -- A hole the size of a small car in the underside of a Qantas jumbo jet carrying 346 passengers over the South China Sea forced the pilot to make an emergency landing Friday after a rapid descent.
The Boeing 747-400 was cruising at 29,000 feet when a loud bang rattled the plane. Video shot by a passenger shows people sitting with their oxygen masks on as the jet descended quickly to 10,000 feet. Applause erupted as the plane touched down safely.
[...]
The article went on to describe the incident... but there was only one thing I was looking for, and I couldn't find the answer. That was... Did anyone whip it out and start beating like mad? (That's right - 13 years later, and I still think of that scene everytime I hear about an emergency landing.)
EDIT: Also, another thing I learned from this article - the word fuselage has officially made it into my vocabulary as a place filled with bodies and supplies that only Sawyer and a few others would really go into. It was burned a while ago.
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Rapper and hip-hop mogul 50 Cent sued Taco Bell on Wednesday, saying the restaurant chain made him the star of its hip-hop themed ad campaign without his permission and without paying him a fee.
50 Cent, whose real name is Curtis Jackson, accused the Mexican-style fast food chain of "diluting the value of his good name" and employing a guerrilla advertising campaign to fool consumers into thinking he had endorsed the chain, said the lawsuit, filed in Manhattan federal court.
"Without seeking or obtaining Jackson's authorization, defendant Taco Bell made him the star and focus of its nationwide advertising campaign by using his name, persona and trademark to promote Taco Bell's business and products," court papers said.
The lawsuit accuses the chain of disseminating a letter, addressed to 50 Cent, that encourages the rapper to change his name to "79 Cent," "89 Cent" or "99 Cent."
The letter was designed to promote the company's "79-89-99 Cent Why Pay More" campaign, while avoiding the multimillion-dollar fee the rapper might have charged to use his name, the lawsuit said.
Rob Poetsch, a spokesman for Taco Bell Corp, said, "We made a good faith, charitable offer to 50 Cent to change his name to either 79, 89, or 99 Cent for one day by rapping his order at a Taco Bell, and we would have been very pleased to make the $10,000 donation to the charity of his choice." Taco Bell is operated by Yum! Brands.
The lawsuit said the Taco Bell letter was eventually sent to the rapper, but only after it had been circulated to reporters.
"As Taco Bell intended, many customers believed that 50 Cent had agreed to endorse Taco Bell's products. Indeed, postings on numerous Internet 'blogs' castigated 50 Cent for 'selling out' by his apparent endorsement of Taco Bell," the lawsuit said.
Since his debut album in 2003, 50 Cent has built a business with a record label, a clothing and footwear line, ringtones and video games. He has also starred in a movie based on his life, "Get Rich or Die Tryin'."
Okay, good name? Any rapper who makes God knows how many albums about how he got shot a couple of times, then stars in a game where he becomes a mercenary fighting terrorists in the middle east does not have a good name to dilute.
Well, I think the point was that he feels he stands for something. I'm not sure what exactly, but there you'll have it. Becoming some gimmick for a taco bell ad campaign isn't likely it and I can at least imagine that.
I work in marketing, so I understand the issue here. Whenever you make anything public with the intent of earning more customers, you have to be careful. If you make any reference to any other legal entity, you are required to get their permission first.
We marketers are looked down upon a lot, and for good reason. The law has loopholes and gray areas, and depending on the integrity of your company, you might be willing to sell it for a price. Taco Bell is in the wrong here. They are trying to get some advertisements and attention for less than they should pay for in normal channels. Taco Bell offered to donate $10,000 in charity if he changed his name to 79, 89, or 99 cent for a day.
That all sounds well and good, but consider it this way. In order to use his name, they are required to pay millions of dollars for it, as specified by 50 cent's lawyers. What Taco Bell did was not philanthropic, it was simply a way to get around paying millions of dollars. If they were feeling philanthropic, they could have gone through legal channels and offered to take the million they should have paid and donated that instead of a paltry $10,000, which a company the size of Taco Bell would not miss.
But hey, that's the world of business. You look at what's ethical, and you look at the possible profit you can gain, and you do a cost-benefit analysis on your soul.
In my job, this is something we deal with all the time. I work in outsourcing, and that's pretty much a dirty word in the US at the moment, because ignorant hicks without any grasp of economics start spouting off about "stealing American jobs". We've had some pretty big clients ourselves, but we have to be incredibly careful about telling people who they are. Oftentimes we need permission in advance, or we need to abide by the current usage guidelines specified by our clients. In other words, it's a pain in the ass. But we're good guys at my firm, we still keep our souls.
Edit: However, I must admit that 50 Cent is really taking a white approach to solving his problems by suing. My knowledge of the rap community is lacking, but I don't think many rap songs glorify suing each other when two young urban gentlemen have a conflict.
Comments
Nolonger, I perfectly understand the basis of your thoughts: finding humor where humor does not normally belong. I think most of us subscribe to that at one point or another.
But I think what is happening here is that you are young and naive. Don't misunderstand, this is not an attack on you or your character; it is just simple fact. I doubt you have had much experience with death or near-death. And I'm not talking about an old grandmother reaching the end of a long life; I'm talking about someone who is very close to you having their life violently cut short, or at least coming very close. I have seen lives violently ended before, and I've seen the pain in their family's eyes. It's a sight that always stays with me, and it drives me to enjoy life.
I also understand what you are trying to say about this guy, how he needs to move on and not dwell on the past. I agree with the thought in theory, but not how you describe it in practice. Two weeks seems like a long time in youth, but as you get older you realize two weeks is nothing more than a blip. If you are an empathetic person, trust me on this one, it will take you years to fully get over something like that, and that is ONLY if the victim in question has no long term injuries.
But what this person did is not get over it. He made a mockery of it. If I were the brother or friend of the person he injured in the car, I would have beat the shit out of him. And I don't mean that figuratively, I mean that literally. I would have come at him with a baseball bat and beat him into a bloody submission until he got so scared or so weak that he shit himself.
Once you have seen the specter of death looming over someone you love, you will understand what I'm telling you.
EDIT: I had reread in depth what was posted earlier, and I had a few more comments to add:
Let's make a hypothetical here. Let's say I was this guy. I for whatever impossible reason got really drunk and got in a DUI accident and hospitalized a girl. Common empathy dictates the following:
1. I realize that I did something incredibly stupid, and I go to great lengths to ensure it never happens again. I go to some form of rehab, learning to drink responsibly, etc.
2. I sure as hell don't drink for a long time, to get my thoughts and emotions in order.
3. I do whatever I can to make sure the family knows I'm sorry. I pay for as much of the medical bills as I can. I visit every day to bring flowers, gifts, whatever. If the family doesn't want me near them, then I at least stop by daily to leave something for the victim for them to deliver.
4. If I woke up after a week like you said and realized I was dead inside and stopped caring, I would at least have the foresight to know "oh shit my sentencing is coming up sometime soon I should at least pretend to be remorseful! I can skip the party next weekend and tell the judge about my choice, because that might help me not go to jail!"
As for your earlier comment about if a friend's mom died, I have to strongly disagree with that. Behemoth and I have a good friend whose mom died, and it pretty much ruined our fucking days.
Are the supporters of the sentence saying that this man's photo shows contempt for the court, and that such contempt requires additional jail time?
Well then lock me up and throw away the key.
What's the purpose of punishment? Rehabilitate a single prisoner? Send a message to those who would possibly commit the crime in the future? Or do we punish criminals because it makes us feel good to do so?
Someone correct me, but I think that a conviction gives you a standard for a sentence. Drunk driving probably requires some jail time.
BUT
A judge is allowed to show leniency if he feels it is necessary. Someone who is literally sick and vomiting at the prospect of going to jail for the only mistake he ever made in his entire life is going to be seen differently than the guy who rolls his eyes and says "I'm sooooorrry, it won't happen again," like a kid who is forced by his parents to apologize.
If you drink, drive, and seriously hurt someone, you normally go to jail. Probation is more of a test and a prize. It's a test to see if you can earn it, and it's a prize in that you get that INSTEAD of going to jail.
The facebook guy obviously failed the test. He failed because he didn't show remorse outside of the court. He didn't get punished worse or unfairly for his actions. He just got the standard, normal punishment.
I BET YOU WILL WISH YOU DIDN'T STEAL MY LUNCH MONEY WHEN YOU'RE IN THE ELECTRIC CHAIR, DAVE
And the list could go on. Two weeks is not enough time to sort through these thoughts, unless you didn't have them to begin with. THAT is why I agree with sending him to jail, and why I don't think that he was remorseful.
I also agree with Ryan's comment about even if he DID honestly feel bad about it, but just for like a week-- if that were to happen, I also think he should have just pretended. The disrespect for the victim and family comes into play there.
Were I in that man's situation, I could totally see myself going to a party within two weeks. Being remorseful is normal, but don't think that remorse and partying are mutually exclusive. Some people deal with grief in their own ways.
How long does everybody think is an appropriate time to wait after injuring somebody before getting on with your life?
Let me get this straight among you folks, though: I totally think this guy was being an asshole. The beef I have is the deeper meaning I'm getting out of some of your posts: that to have fun two weeks after injuring somebody is in some way morally reprehensible, as if the only decent thing to do would have been to join a monastery. Please note that just like my mental image of Jake with a gavel, I'm picturing a few of you kneeling in the pews at a catholic church while praying to God to smite anybody who ever laughs at any point in their life after stepping on somebody's heel.
No, honestly, that's the mental picture I'm painting.
To reiterate: I think this particular guy was an asshole. The thing I'm worried about now is ever telling any of you folks that I made a mistake in my life lest you think I'm a douchebag if I don't apologize for it every waking moment of my life.
I had said earlier that if it were me, I wouldn't have gone to the party. But to each his own; while I think it would be more or less irresponsible to do so, people also need to find some normalcy in their lives.
But, as stated before, he made a mockery of it. He had hurt a family and decided it funny. Not only that, he was stupid enough to get caught by posting pictures of his misadventures on Facebook. And he got caught. And he got his normal drunk driving punishment for something of that severity. I was satisfied that probation was not given to someone in my eyes had not earned it, as stated in my last post.
Alright, John, you got me there. I suppose being inclined to increase his sentence just because he went to a party is unreasonable. However, this is a moot point since he went above and beyond the call of duty with that damn costume.
Is everyone having a problem with punishment that is based on someone's character? Is that what we're getting down to? Because I'm pretty sure that's an inherent aspect of our legal system. You get punished for committing a crime, and sentencing (and the original verdict, for that matter) can be more lenient if you show remorse for your crimes and a desire to prevent reoccurrence of the situation.
Of course, remorse also shows guilt, so if you're trying to make a case against guilt, remorse may not be the best way to go. But when it comes down to sentencing, douches do far worse than saints.
NZ judge backs girl over 'embarrassing' name
Regarding Variable's desired name, I'm gonna take a shot in the dark... "Fuck Censorship"?
Is it bad that I think some of these names are totally awesome?
So it is sad that I saw this -
The article went on to describe the incident... but there was only one thing I was looking for, and I couldn't find the answer. That was... Did anyone whip it out and start beating like mad? (That's right - 13 years later, and I still think of that scene everytime I hear about an emergency landing.)
EDIT: Also, another thing I learned from this article - the word fuselage has officially made it into my vocabulary as a place filled with bodies and supplies that only Sawyer and a few others would really go into. It was burned a while ago.
50 Cent says Taco Bell stole his endorsement
We marketers are looked down upon a lot, and for good reason. The law has loopholes and gray areas, and depending on the integrity of your company, you might be willing to sell it for a price. Taco Bell is in the wrong here. They are trying to get some advertisements and attention for less than they should pay for in normal channels. Taco Bell offered to donate $10,000 in charity if he changed his name to 79, 89, or 99 cent for a day.
That all sounds well and good, but consider it this way. In order to use his name, they are required to pay millions of dollars for it, as specified by 50 cent's lawyers. What Taco Bell did was not philanthropic, it was simply a way to get around paying millions of dollars. If they were feeling philanthropic, they could have gone through legal channels and offered to take the million they should have paid and donated that instead of a paltry $10,000, which a company the size of Taco Bell would not miss.
But hey, that's the world of business. You look at what's ethical, and you look at the possible profit you can gain, and you do a cost-benefit analysis on your soul.
In my job, this is something we deal with all the time. I work in outsourcing, and that's pretty much a dirty word in the US at the moment, because ignorant hicks without any grasp of economics start spouting off about "stealing American jobs". We've had some pretty big clients ourselves, but we have to be incredibly careful about telling people who they are. Oftentimes we need permission in advance, or we need to abide by the current usage guidelines specified by our clients. In other words, it's a pain in the ass. But we're good guys at my firm, we still keep our souls.
Edit: However, I must admit that 50 Cent is really taking a white approach to solving his problems by suing. My knowledge of the rap community is lacking, but I don't think many rap songs glorify suing each other when two young urban gentlemen have a conflict.