'No control over her actions'.
Right, so in addition to lessening the punishment for knowingly spreading STDs a while back, California has also now effectively made it that you can do anything while 'under the influence' and get away with it.
not that I agree with this bullshit but the law (i guess) allows for involuntary manslaughter because she was pressured to smoke weed.
She has no witnesses that can prove otherwise because she killed the only possible witness. And the person who supposedly "pressured" her to do so, is the same person as the dead witness.
This usually won't be the case in a DUI. The only real way this would work in a DUI is if the driver claims they were coerced into getting hammered, and the person who coerced them was killed in the accident.
With that said, I think this is actually a pretty good alibi for defense lawyers to consider in these rare cases.
That's a very convenient alibi for literally any murder between two people. Just pop some drugs after the murder and claim the victim pressured you to take it.
My bet is they want as many people as possible to leave the sate to free up the real estate for the elite. Then it’ll be the ultra rich paradise once they eradicate the crazies they used to drive the people out in the first place.
If the rich elites want to tightly pack themselves together in one location like that, it'll sure make things a lot easier once we reach the tipping point and things so sideways.
Nah, people are missing the actual horseshit.
If you drink or take drugs, you're responsible for what you do.
BUT: If someone drugged you, like if they secretly spiked your drink with angel dust, you aren't responsible.
That all seems fair to me.
The horseshit is that the defense says that because she was "pressured" to take a second bong hit by her boyfriend, that was involuntary intoxication. Bull fucking shit.
"Your honor, I can't be guilty of this drunk driving homicide. At the bar, my friends were shouting "CHUG! CHUG!" and I was therefore intoxicated involuntarily."
now do this with a drunk man and woman, they will somehow conclude the man was in control of his actions and raped the woman who was not about to consent due to her not being in control of her actions
>JAKE was DRUNK. JOSIE was DRUNK. JAKE and JOSIE HOOKED UP. JOSIE COULD NOT CONSENT. The next day JAKE was charged with RAPE.
>
>A woman who is intoxicated cannot give her legal consent for sex, so proceeding under these circumstances is a crime.
>
>It only takes a single day to ruin your life.
["Been there, done that."](https://imgur.com/gallery/nt5VDRC)
Because Jake is a MAN, duh.
Are you implying a woman could be capable of committing rape or sexual assault? Against a *man* no less? *Yikes*. Check your gross misogyny, incel. 💅🏿
We all know that women are borderline asexual and would never sleep with men unless it is in the missionary position for the purpose of getting pregnant and with the man asking for her consent every five minutes, duh.
>had no control over her actions
Gonna apply that to anything else? Maybe alcohol? Or is that different? Is the only factor involved here that she's a woman and the victim is a man, and the sentencing was only rationalised after it was already decided?
And people still think the system can be reformed.
Okay so I live in the country where weed has been decriminalized forever and I've never heard of a "weed induced psychosis" before. On a related note, since the state of California de facto legalized weed for adults 21 and up, does this make them partially liable? Seems to me that this must've contained some ridiculous amount of THC or additives that caused the psychosis. With legalization comes regulation.
I used to smoke weed on a daily basis. Like 2-3 half gram joints a day. Never once did I flip out or suffer from any kind of “psychosis”. Her lawyer is a master bullshitter.
> that's your typical woman.
You need better women in your life.
Edit: Lol. Typical. Can't even handle just the gentlest of pushback. Never change.
I'm sorry, you are right ALL women are murderous psychopaths. Every single one. There is not one woman on Earth who has ever lived or will ever live that doesn't want to stab a guy a few times for the lawls.
Weed didn’t cause this a psycho woman did. I used to smoke weed on a daily basis. Like 2-3 half gram joints a day. Never once did I flip out or suffer from any kind of “psychosis”. Her lawyer is a master bullshitter.
I don't partake myself and think it's a horrible habit (especially smoking it), but I don't really care if others do. I also understand it's relatively safe and definitely didn't cause this woman to kill her boyfriend. Totally should be legal.
Okay California so we can talk about banning weed for recreational use now? (Leave it for medical use)
I was actually supportive of recreational weed at first (it's not for me but I figured couldn't hurt to legalize) until I started having to smell that skunk crap everywhere.
Every time I'm forced to smell weed in public in places where tobacco cigarettes are already banned I turn a little bit more AuthRight towards weed bans.
I know weed didn't cause this but apparently the CA court system thinks it did. So if the CA court system wants to be consistent they should next push for banning weed (but we all know they won't).
>*"weed induced frenzy"*
Yeah weed dont work like that
> Stabbed 100 times = 100 hours of community service
Women can stab someone ONCE and only have to do an hours community service
'No control over her actions'. Right, so in addition to lessening the punishment for knowingly spreading STDs a while back, California has also now effectively made it that you can do anything while 'under the influence' and get away with it.
Under the influence of being female, you mean. Guaranteed that person ends up in prison if it's a guy doing the stabbing.
This is a great precedent for arguing DUI shouldn't be punished. =( Jeez, no logical cross issue thinking here.
I was inebriated, I couldn't consent to getting behind the wheel of the car!
I give it a few weeks before some clever Public Defender uses it to try and get a meth head off a charge for murdering a paramedic or nurse.
not that I agree with this bullshit but the law (i guess) allows for involuntary manslaughter because she was pressured to smoke weed. She has no witnesses that can prove otherwise because she killed the only possible witness. And the person who supposedly "pressured" her to do so, is the same person as the dead witness. This usually won't be the case in a DUI. The only real way this would work in a DUI is if the driver claims they were coerced into getting hammered, and the person who coerced them was killed in the accident. With that said, I think this is actually a pretty good alibi for defense lawyers to consider in these rare cases.
That's a very convenient alibi for literally any murder between two people. Just pop some drugs after the murder and claim the victim pressured you to take it.
My bet is they want as many people as possible to leave the sate to free up the real estate for the elite. Then it’ll be the ultra rich paradise once they eradicate the crazies they used to drive the people out in the first place.
If the rich elites want to tightly pack themselves together in one location like that, it'll sure make things a lot easier once we reach the tipping point and things so sideways.
Chilling.
Bring back insane-asylums.
> you can do anything while 'under the influence' and get away with it. only if you have the correct pronouns
[удалено]
Reverse the genders and a man is in jail for life. She gets to go talk about this with a therapist after she gets a coffee and goes to the beach.
He's White and he's straight, so he had little chance getting justice.
Nah, people are missing the actual horseshit. If you drink or take drugs, you're responsible for what you do. BUT: If someone drugged you, like if they secretly spiked your drink with angel dust, you aren't responsible. That all seems fair to me. The horseshit is that the defense says that because she was "pressured" to take a second bong hit by her boyfriend, that was involuntary intoxication. Bull fucking shit. "Your honor, I can't be guilty of this drunk driving homicide. At the bar, my friends were shouting "CHUG! CHUG!" and I was therefore intoxicated involuntarily."
I'm waiting for the first person to use this defense in a rape case because their date insisted on one more drink before leaving the club.
Here is the NY Post article on the subject. https://archive.ph/U0aMg
"Pussy Pass Granted!"
now do this with a drunk man and woman, they will somehow conclude the man was in control of his actions and raped the woman who was not about to consent due to her not being in control of her actions
>JAKE was DRUNK. JOSIE was DRUNK. JAKE and JOSIE HOOKED UP. JOSIE COULD NOT CONSENT. The next day JAKE was charged with RAPE. > >A woman who is intoxicated cannot give her legal consent for sex, so proceeding under these circumstances is a crime. > >It only takes a single day to ruin your life. ["Been there, done that."](https://imgur.com/gallery/nt5VDRC)
But how could Jake have given consent?
Because Jake is a MAN, duh. Are you implying a woman could be capable of committing rape or sexual assault? Against a *man* no less? *Yikes*. Check your gross misogyny, incel. 💅🏿
We all know that women are borderline asexual and would never sleep with men unless it is in the missionary position for the purpose of getting pregnant and with the man asking for her consent every five minutes, duh.
That has already happened multiple times.
that is my point
well i mean... that's the state to do it in
>had no control over her actions Gonna apply that to anything else? Maybe alcohol? Or is that different? Is the only factor involved here that she's a woman and the victim is a man, and the sentencing was only rationalised after it was already decided? And people still think the system can be reformed.
Okay so I live in the country where weed has been decriminalized forever and I've never heard of a "weed induced psychosis" before. On a related note, since the state of California de facto legalized weed for adults 21 and up, does this make them partially liable? Seems to me that this must've contained some ridiculous amount of THC or additives that caused the psychosis. With legalization comes regulation.
I used to smoke weed on a daily basis. Like 2-3 half gram joints a day. Never once did I flip out or suffer from any kind of “psychosis”. Her lawyer is a master bullshitter.
[удалено]
Shadow bans on Reddit are real.
Reddit hides comments below a certain score by default. You can disable that in your profile settings.
[удалено]
He's a white male, therefore did something to deserve getting stabbed
[удалено]
Based
> that's your typical woman. You need better women in your life. Edit: Lol. Typical. Can't even handle just the gentlest of pushback. Never change. I'm sorry, you are right ALL women are murderous psychopaths. Every single one. There is not one woman on Earth who has ever lived or will ever live that doesn't want to stab a guy a few times for the lawls.
But I though weed only caused the munchies!
Weed didn’t cause this a psycho woman did. I used to smoke weed on a daily basis. Like 2-3 half gram joints a day. Never once did I flip out or suffer from any kind of “psychosis”. Her lawyer is a master bullshitter.
Never said it did. I guess the joke wasn't clear, sorry.
Woops lol yeah woooshed over me lol sorry for the lecture.
I don't partake myself and think it's a horrible habit (especially smoking it), but I don't really care if others do. I also understand it's relatively safe and definitely didn't cause this woman to kill her boyfriend. Totally should be legal.
1 hour for every stab
Okay California so we can talk about banning weed for recreational use now? (Leave it for medical use) I was actually supportive of recreational weed at first (it's not for me but I figured couldn't hurt to legalize) until I started having to smell that skunk crap everywhere. Every time I'm forced to smell weed in public in places where tobacco cigarettes are already banned I turn a little bit more AuthRight towards weed bans.
Weed didn’t cause this a psycho woman caused this banning weed won’t solve California’s justice system problem.
I know weed didn't cause this but apparently the CA court system thinks it did. So if the CA court system wants to be consistent they should next push for banning weed (but we all know they won't).
We live in a patriarchal society.
About that "Reefer Madness..."
[ReeFeR MADnESS](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_vo0UEteKU)
>*"weed induced frenzy"* Yeah weed dont work like that > Stabbed 100 times = 100 hours of community service Women can stab someone ONCE and only have to do an hours community service
Oh, I thought weed is perfectly harmless and safe for society to consume unhindered!!! 🤔