Would that be justice?

[liberty]

This man, when he was 19, pushed an Asian grandfather face‑first onto the sidewalk and caused his death. He was originally charged with murder but was convicted of manslaughter. The judge sentenced him to probation.

However, the family can still sue for wrongful death. That would mean, among other things, that his wages could be garnished to a certain extent, making him a slave to that debt for years to come, maybe for life.

So do you think the family should sue, and would that be justice? Has justice been done, and how much money is an 84‑year‑old Asian man's life worth?

https://abc7news.com/post/antoine-watso ... /18781405/

[Joe Guy]

If it was my grandfather, I would sue. I would consider the award to be social justice because I am a communist.

[MajGenl.Meade]

I vote sue. And I would place the grandfather's "value" as about equal to mine or yours or anyone else - i.e. immeasurable

[liberty]

If it was my grandfather, I would sue. I would consider the award to be social justice because I am a communist.

Well, if you’re actually a communist, I can’t have much sympathy for you. If you really believe in that ideology, then you’ve supported doing the same things, or worse, to other people a hundred million times over

[Bicycle Bill]

So do you think the family should sue, and would that be justice? Has justice been done, and how much money is an 84‑year‑old Asian man's life worth?

If it had been YOUR 84-year-old grandfather, would you be asking these same silly questions?   Hell, you'd have probably been holding out for "Murder-1" and the death penalty from the get-go, and demanded to be the one to flip the switch or push the button on the chair or the chamber or the injection machine when the time came.

-"BB"-

[liberty]

So do you think the family should sue, and would that be justice? Has justice been done, and how much money is an 84‑year‑old Asian man's life worth?

If it had been YOUR 84-year-old grandfather, would you be asking these same silly questions?   Hell, you'd have probably been holding out for "Murder-1" and the death penalty from the get-go, and demanded to be the one to flip the switch or push the button on the chair or the chamber or the injection machine when the time came.

-"BB"-

You're entirely correct, it is a silly question, because I know exactly what I would do. I wouldn’t demand Murder One; I would comply with the law. It is manslaughter, and the guy should spend some time in prison. Whether he spent time in jail already doesn’t matter; jail is not punishment, it’s merely confinement to ensure you are present for trial.

The individual made the excuse that he had a hard life. Well, welcome to the party; that’s a very common thing. I had a stepfather who tried to destroy my life by trying to make me feel worthless. I didn’t go along with the program; I resisted. He broke my seven‑year‑old nose, but I later got it fixed. I didn’t submit, I resisted.

Now this guy is a fragile snowflake. That’s his problem. He can’t take it out on other people.

I wouldn’t expect to make any money by suing. I’d expect to lose money, because no lawyer would take such a case on contingency. But I would try to make life as hard for him as I could.

And the fact is, just because you get a judgment doesn’t mean you’ll ever collect a cent. One way to escape wage garnishment is simply to found a non‑profit and pay yourself an income that can’t be garnished. I think it’s a loophole, even unethical, but the law permits it.

.

[Burning Petard]

What would be justice? You ask on the day before Palm Sunday? There is no justice in this world.

snailgate

[Big RR]

Well, if you’re actually a communist, I can’t have much sympathy for you. If you really believe in that ideology, then you’ve supported doing the same things, or worse, to other people a hundred million times over

Please; nothing says communist regimes have to be totalitarian dictatorships; certainly a number have been (as have capitalist regimes run by dictators--or oligarchies like the current Russia), but communism does not demand that. Most successful communist "societies" have been on smaller scales, usually small settlements or communes of dedicated people who support each other and share resources and face no oppression. Of course, human nature being what it is, the larger the society gets the more it is difficult to keep the people who think they are "more equal" trying to take more, leading to some of the abuses you point to. But that is not because communism demands it, it's more that greed demands it.

[liberty]

Well, if you’re actually a communist, I can’t have much sympathy for you. If you really believe in that ideology, then you’ve supported doing the same things, or worse, to other people a hundred million times over

Please; nothing says communist regimes have to be totalitarian dictatorships; certainly a number have been (as have capitalist regimes run by dictators--or oligarchies like the current Russia), but communism does not demand that. Most successful communist "societies" have been on smaller scales, usually small settlements or communes of dedicated people who support each other and share resources and face no oppression. Of course, human nature being what it is, the larger the society gets the more it is difficult to keep the people who think they are "more equal" trying to take more, leading to some of the abuses you point to. But that is not because communism demands it, it's more that greed demands it.

I don’t know of any national or state governments in the 20th century that were communist and not dictatorships or totalitarian systems; regimes where simple obedience to the law wasn’t enough, because you also had to obey with the “correct” attitude. And I’m not talking about democratic governments where communist parties held some power, since that is a different situation entirely.

What you’re describing isn’t communism as it actually existed in those governments; I tend to call it communal living rather than communism, just to make a distinction. That distinction matters because of the horrific events of the 20th century. A system based on total collective control can work on a small scale, within a family or a close group of friends, where people are bound by trust, shared history, or long‑term relationships; but on a national level, it almost always leads to abuse. Whenever anyone has total power, abuse becomes predictable.

A “dictatorship of the proletariat” is still a dictatorship in terms of how government power operates.

And since we’re talking about communism, this whole discussion reminds me of when the truth about the Khmer Rouge began to leak out. At first, many on the left dismissed the reports as right‑wing propaganda, especially because some of the earliest accounts appeared in Reader’s Digest; but eventually, all except for the most extreme voices acknowledged that the stories were accurate. It was simply communism taken to its most extreme and brutal form.

[Big RR]

Just because a bunch of totalitarian jerks have perverted the economic theories of communism to their own ends does not make communism wrong (anymore than the dictators of capitalist societies prove capitalism is a failed system); add to that the US government's efforts to destabilize the more democratic communist governments and replace them with worse dictators who were not left leaning (remember Salvador Allende of Chile (succeeded by Pinochet) or Nicaragua or even Cuba?) if left alone these societies might well have become democratic, but the US pressure pushed them toward the Russian or Chinese and the excesses there).

Again, I do not know if communism is a workable economic system in a world motivated by greed, but then I do think it is possible and would like to see some of them given the chance to develop normlly without the outside pressure of US interests.