Racist RIS?
(
Hitler's Barber Soylent Green is high in saturated fat,
Mon 16 Apr 2012, 20:40,
archived)
He has an odd face. It's too large and comes out too far forwards. It looks like its been molded on top of another face.No man has that much forehead.
(
Mu Dinofiddler,
Mon 16 Apr 2012, 20:52,
archived)
It kind of does......and the neckbeardthing could be there to cover up the seam.
(
Extinct Jesus Dossier "...I think it counteracts Hitler's magic...",
Mon 16 Apr 2012, 21:14,
archived)
reminds me of the bloke in the painting in Ghostbusters 2
h3donist tryin' to play me out as if my name is Sega..,
Mon 16 Apr 2012, 21:57,
archived)
Vigo?You are like the buzzing of flies to him!
(
ferret -> twitter.com/syfyautocorrect <-,
Tue 17 Apr 2012, 0:21,
archived)
He wins the category of best dressed mass murderers, hands down. But the sideburns that go all the way from ear to ear scream "guilty".
(
cowcat Bituminous squeegee,
Mon 16 Apr 2012, 20:54,
archived)
I think Jeffrey Dahmer had a better hair cut.
(
cowcat Bituminous squeegee,
Mon 16 Apr 2012, 21:08,
archived)
It's seems to be a cross between a goatee and a neckbeard
(
Photoshop Bitch 2014 edition,
Mon 16 Apr 2012, 21:04,
archived)
Wow, he was a sharp dressed psycho. I think we need to call in the referees.
( cowcat Bituminous squeegee,
Mon 16 Apr 2012, 21:17,
archived)
Why is it that people who actually committed murderer lots of times are called serial killerswhereas people who didn't technically murder but killed lots of people indiscriminately are called mass murderers?
( Photoshop Bitch 2014 edition,
Mon 16 Apr 2012, 21:15,
archived)
How is killing people indiscriminately not murder? Is there some definition of murder someone hasn't told me?
(
Mu Dinofiddler,
Mon 16 Apr 2012, 21:17,
archived)
Murder is premeditated and specific, otherwise it's manslaughterSo if I decided to walk outside and kill the first person I saw it would be manslaughter. But if I decided specifically to kill you it would be murder.
( Photoshop Bitch 2014 edition,
Mon 16 Apr 2012, 21:20,
archived)
No, if you'd had the fore-thought to kill "someone", that's premeditation.
(
Mu Dinofiddler,
Mon 16 Apr 2012, 21:22,
archived)
And yes, in common law fore-thought does count as that even though you don't have a specific target in mind.
(
Mu Dinofiddler,
Mon 16 Apr 2012, 21:24,
archived)
I could cite wikipedia, but we've all lost interest already.Who has something shiny we can play with?
( Mu Dinofiddler,
Mon 16 Apr 2012, 21:25,
archived)
I'm pretty sure it only counts as murder if you aimed to kill a specific personalthough I suppose "specific" can be rather vague
( Photoshop Bitch 2014 edition,
Mon 16 Apr 2012, 21:27,
archived)
Oh he's got premeditated intent just by intending to shoot people. Intent to commit the crime is enough.The four states of mind recognized as constituting "malice" are:
Intent to kill,
Intent to inflict grievous bodily harm short of death,
Reckless indifference to an unjustifiably high risk to human life (sometimes described as an "abandoned and malignant heart"), or
Intent to commit a dangerous felony (the "felony-murder" doctrine).
His actions were practically the definiton of malicious fore-thought.
(Intent to kill,
Intent to inflict grievous bodily harm short of death,
Reckless indifference to an unjustifiably high risk to human life (sometimes described as an "abandoned and malignant heart"), or
Intent to commit a dangerous felony (the "felony-murder" doctrine).
His actions were practically the definiton of malicious fore-thought.
Mu Dinofiddler,
Mon 16 Apr 2012, 21:32,
archived)
Which is funny, because meditation is supposed to make you calmer the wub - guide onion for the blind,
Mon 16 Apr 2012, 21:30,
archived)
Aw man, I recently switched to Buddhism. Is Buddha going to try and kill me? I'm so fucking tired of my gods trying to kill me.
( Mu Dinofiddler,
Mon 16 Apr 2012, 21:34,
archived)
I think the murders have to be done on more than 2 separate occasions to be a serial killer.
(
4Q just lurking,
Mon 16 Apr 2012, 21:19,
archived)
The guy is obviously completely insanei'm almost finding it a bit odd this is in a court given he's murdered over seventy people on a hate induced rampage, and not having his insanity discussed in a secure asylum by doctors and other medical staff
(
Jahled Three shades of black,
Mon 16 Apr 2012, 21:17,
archived)
I thought the same. But that would be a slippery slope. Weird world we've created. I believe we're better off this way, as weird as it is. Lynch mobs are no fun.
( cowcat Bituminous squeegee,
Mon 16 Apr 2012, 21:20,
archived)
It was, twiceThis court case is basically to decide whether or not he is, legally, insane under Norwegian law. The first assessment said that yes, he was insane. The second assessment, a couple of weeks back, said no, he wasn't. So the trial has to decide first whether or not he'll be tried or whether he'll be locked in an asylum.
Yes, in most countries he'd be judged very quickly as being lucid enough to know what he did was "wrong" - he's admitted that himself, happily, in front of a judge. But Norwegian law doesn't work on those lines, though it almost certainly will as soon as the issue can be debated in parliament and changes made to the legislation. Norwegian law says you have to be judged medically insane, and simply being a psychopath is not judged as being medically insane for whatever stupid reason. (The first assessment judged him to have paranoid schizophrenia, along with numerous other pyschoses.)
(Yes, in most countries he'd be judged very quickly as being lucid enough to know what he did was "wrong" - he's admitted that himself, happily, in front of a judge. But Norwegian law doesn't work on those lines, though it almost certainly will as soon as the issue can be debated in parliament and changes made to the legislation. Norwegian law says you have to be judged medically insane, and simply being a psychopath is not judged as being medically insane for whatever stupid reason. (The first assessment judged him to have paranoid schizophrenia, along with numerous other pyschoses.)
boris the spider,
Mon 16 Apr 2012, 21:22,
archived)
Paranoid Schizophrenia is not the same as being a Psychopath.Paranoid schizophrenia involves, well, paranoia... voices and messed up emotions and shit. Psychopaths are much more rational.
( Mu Dinofiddler,
Mon 16 Apr 2012, 21:39,
archived)
No, it's clearly not the sameSince being judged a paranoid schizophrenic was enough to get him declared insane, while being judged a psychopath wasn't...
( boris the spider,
Mon 16 Apr 2012, 21:55,
archived)
Which shows that there's a difference between the two and that being a psychopath isn't the same as being a raging homicidal maniac.Most psychopaths don't go on rampages.
( Mu Dinofiddler,
Mon 16 Apr 2012, 21:59,
archived)
Doubtless also trueI'm certainly not trying to argue with you about this :)
( boris the spider,
Mon 16 Apr 2012, 22:19,
archived)
he's already been declared sane though hasn't he before he could stand trial in a criminal court
(,
Mon 16 Apr 2012, 21:24,
archived)
he was declared insanethen was declared sane in a separate assessment. i don't know what would've happened if he'd been declared insane the second time, but i imagine it would have gone to court anyway, so they could lock him away legally. but i'm not sure - i'm not norwegian, i just live here...
( boris the spider,
Mon 16 Apr 2012, 21:57,
archived)
hahawhatever happens, i'm imagining he'll "commit suicide" within a year or two anyway
( boris the spider,
Mon 16 Apr 2012, 22:20,
archived)
Is it the budget again already?
Wobbly Bloke Hello, did I miss anything on,
Mon 16 Apr 2012, 21:19,
archived)