Yes, they agreed they couldn't agree and then they agreed they could agree. And the verdict they could agree on was not guilty.
FlowVoid
joined 2 years ago
Or maybe it proves that society has deemed intentionally menacing bystanders, particularly for money, to be completely unacceptable.
You don't have a monopoly on reasonableness. Twelve jurors, not Redditors, agreed that the YouTuber was behaving aggressively, and violence is a common response to aggression.
And the YouTuber's entire shtick is to make people think they might be in danger, by not letting them back away. Because that's how fights commonly start. If he did the same routine ten feet away from his victims, the whole shtick would fail.
It is not normal to behave aggressively towards someone, get within range to hit them, and then repeatedly close in when the other person tries to backs away. It is not normal for cis people and it is not normal for trans people.
When someone does those things, it generally signals they intend to start a fight.
What did the US gain in Vietnam?
What did the USSR gain in Afghanistan?
Superpowers have a long history of leaving quagmires with their tails tucked between their legs.
The USSR and the US both backed down in Afghanistan, gaining nothing.
The US also backed down in Vietnam, gaining nothing.
Ukraine is Russia's Vietnam. They will leave Ukraine when they realize they will never gain anything by staying.
We already have a hostile response, so the golden bridge is no longer useful.
war mongering
Nowadays when the US gets involved in a war, Europe generally joins them.
the blatant racism
Blatant racism is found throughout Europe.
homophobia
Has Italy legalized gay marriage yet? No? Can gay Italian couples at least adopt children? Oh, that's a shame. How about Greece? Huh.
Christian lobby
Several European countries have major political parties with Christian in their very name. One European country even founded their own state religion.
Trump was visiting foreign countries
Italy practically invented the media-buffoon/fascist-politico/laughingstock combo.
And Trump, like Berlusconi, is no longer in power. But Meloni and Orban still are.
You can certainly put them in jail for attempted murder. And that doesn't require proving they intended to kill that person, it only requires "conscious disregard" of whether their action could kill someone. For example, randomly shooting into someone's house.
Brandishing a firearm can be illegal even if you don't draw it.
¡At least two of those languages have the same problem!
Justice is not only about rehabilitation, a punitive component serves the common good.
That may sound barbaric, but consider an alternative where prisoners are released as soon as they are rehabilitated (i.e. when it is clear that they no longer pose a threat to society):
A man is killed by a drunk driver. The driver is fully repentant and it is very quickly clear to all that they will never drink again, much less drink and drive. The driver is released as soon as this is clear.
The man's son is horrified that the driver was punished so lightly. He kills the driver in revenge. But it is clear this will never happen again, you can only lose your father to drunk driving once. The killer is soon released.
The driver's son is horrified that his father's killer was punished so lightly. Since nobody else will do anything, he kills his father's killer in revenge. Clearly he can never do this again ...
See the problem? Judicial punishment isn't about some vague societal bloodlust, it's an intercession that prevents unsatisfied victims from taking matters into their own hands and starting an endless vendetta.