Tsa-La-Gie Oyate, on 25 January 2013 - 04:33 PM, said:
Also what on earth anyone had 45 beers...impossible, the man assumed he drank that many, so he was completely drunk not to know how many he had.
I can pretty easily drink about half that in a casual night out shooting pool. It shouldn't be that difficult for someone doing nothing but sitting drinking and being mad to down a couple of cases in the course of a long evening.
As far as the FOX vs everybody else media discussion, as always, it both amuses me and saddens me to watch the sides go back and forth. The media is like a debate team meet. The sides each have their talking points to defend and their goal isn't to be right or tell the truth, it's to sound more convincing. The only difference is that the sponsors of this particular debate team meet are using it as a distraction so no one will notice them circulating through the audience picking pockets.
As far as the actual subject of the thread, I really hope the FOX Defense wasn't actually a factor in his reduced sentence. It's as specious a defense as a kidnapper and rapist saying he watched Popeye cartoons and knew kidnapping was OK since Bluto kept grabbing Olive Oyl without ever ending up in prison.
The "hate speech needs to be banned" people frustrate me. First, what constitutes hate speech is purely subjective (barring situations where someone literally suggests that listeners commit crimes). Second, it's like the nuts who shoot up schools. There are crazy people who are ticking time bombs who will eventually go off. All they're looking for is something to point them in a given direction. Sure, certain political viewpoints give them a more clear direction, but in absence of those, they'll eventually hear God or Satan telling them what to do. Eliminating speech that might cause someone to dislike someone isn't the solution, the solution is finding a way to identify walking time bombs before they go off.