Luigi Mangione and Daniel Penny display the scale of acceptance for vigilante violence

I wonder why these things don’t happen more often.

 

After what they did to Danny Penny, sadly if I ever find myself in NYC again, and I used to live there, I wouldn't even lift a finger to assist another person in distress, even if I was legally armed, and being escorted personally by the Mayor, Gov, and their security details. Not because I would expect the security details to take care of it, just that I'd rather not waste years of my life fighting charges that never should have been brought for 3 years at who even knows what price.

No, uh uh, wouldn't be prudent.

 

I went from being perfectly healthy to temporarily dead and completely disabled over the timespan of about a year, accumulating over $2,000,000 in medical expenses in the process, including an electric wheelchair that costs more than the car we use to haul it around with. I have not gone bankrupt, and I have not had to spend large amounts of personal money, for example the single most expensive stay I had, right after my intestine exploded (not a medical diagnosis, just casual language) due to surgical complications, came out to $1.4 million, and we were out of pocket exactly $200.f

Why? Because we decided years before the events you just learned about to be prepared for such an occurrence, though we had no reason to think it was coming, and my wife took a position, in part, because of the insurance benefits it came with. If we can make a CHOICE to be prepared, everyone can, because there is nothing special about our lives. We just decided to be prepared, and we were. Everyone should do the same if they expect to have similar results. Expecting others to take care of you because you didn't bother taking care of yourself is unreasonable under any circumstances.

 

You want an option subsidized by taxpayers?

 

It's not "Castle Law", it's "Castle Doctrine", although I'm not sure if that's a substantive difference. How do you perceive that legal premise, regardless of it's name, to mean, and what are the ramifications/implications?

 

sorry it was so complicated for you... I will try to dumb them down for you in the future

 

exactly, but some seem to think no evidence of such damage means it did not happen

 

yep, then can offer a tax credit for those that buy private insurance up to the amount they paid in taxes

Republicans know people would prefer that, thus refuse to give people that choice

 

It is quite difficult to prove something happened if indeed there is no evidence that it did. Neither Juries not anyone else is required to believe anything for which there is no proof.

 

You are very qualified to say something dumb.

It was a hypothetical with too many possible variations.

For instance, does the purpose with the gun know absolutely the other person does not have a gun? Is the person with the gun injured? Is the person running away running away to get away or is he running to pick up some kind of weapon?

I am really not interested in hypothetical situations. The situation with Penny was not hypothetical. A person bombed out of his mind with drugs was threatening other passengers. The other passengers were thankful that Penny took action. In situations like this, passions are up and it is impossible to judge what the other person is doing or threatening to do. In addition, a pathologist cast doubt on whether the man was killed by pressure on his throat. Given the circumstances and the unknowns, the jury reached the right verdict.

 

we all can, and if that is your reading level, I will try to remember to reply to you that way

 

I am sure you can make it dumb. You frequently do.

Apparently, I need to dumb it down for you. Real fights are seldom so uncomplicated that you can make so straightforward that a yes or no answer can be made.

 

if I have to for people that think my posts are too complicated as you seem too

 

Complicated does not completely describe your posts. You are asking opinions on hypothetical situations with too many possible variations. I would have thought by now that, even you, would understand that.

 

like I said, I will try to make my replies to you less complicated

 

If screaming at people was evidence of an intent to kill, there would be a whole load more attempted murder cases going through the courts.

Yet again, I'm not saying there wasn't legitimate concern or that intervening to secure Neely wasn't justified, only that the scale of force was excessive, especially after he had been secured. Your desire to exaggerate the extent and specificity of the threat from Neely is kind of an unspoken admission of the fact.

 

When what you are screaming is I am going to kill some one. It certainly is.

 

And I guess the ones who acknowledge the superiority of Jews are even more forgiven?

 

so you're saying if someone cuts off your blood supply via a choke hold, it's on video, but no damage to the bones in the neck means not guilty

 

Sorry but other people are different than you.

 

No sir I am saying what you see is not supported by the medical evidence. Dude was not choked to death dude died of complications from a schizoprenic episode and a dangerous combination of drugs in his system. He would likely have died in that car whether Penny took him down or not the only question is how many people he would have killed in his drug induced mania before he died had not Penny restrained him.

 

no, you're thinking of strangling the air supply, vs starving of the blood supply to the brain

 

And you are assuming the autopsy missed something.

 

Superiority of Jews?!

 

nope, I am saying that no one claimed this was a strangulation of air that would have posibly cause petichial hemoragging or damaged larnx or throat bones

this was cutting off the blood supply to the brain

"In the autopsy, there was no petichial hemoragging which typically is present with aspxyiation, no damaged larnx or throat bones"

it's like people that use a sock during sex, it's just light pushing on the blood supply, that is where the long term damage comes from - that doesn't normally damage the larnx or throat bone

holding a sock around your partners neck for 6 to 9 minutes could be deadly and also will not cause petechial hemorrhaging or damaged larynx or throat bones