This just in, Sandy Hookers getting sued for Christmas.

[donnay]

You are required to purchasing a license to own a TV in the UK?!?? WTF

They have been doing it for well over 50 years. They would go around the neighborhoods with a radar dish atop a van and check to see who was using a television or radio without the proper permits and licensing.

 

[Weston White]

I don’t see this suit providing any real exposure to the 2012 hoax of Newtown, CT. The scope of this lawsuit will be only on the firearms manufacturer, and its “dangerous” products—further, Bushmaster will not have access to any classified information that the general public would otherwise have through public information requests. Moreover, the lawsuit is desperately pathetic and will effectively fail: Why Shooting Victims Can't Win Lawsuits Against Gunmakers.

 

[devil21]

Keyword : "falsely".

My guess would be if it turned into something like a bank run or actual crime was advocated.



Whenever you can prove a connection and/or show that absence such a provocation, the act would not happen.



The media is hardly above the law, so the standard is the same.



It's not that simple, or else Alex Jones would be executed by now.

Your own words:
"Yeah, free speech is a bitch, lying is not a crime".

But actually it can be if it directly leads to people acting in a manner that endangers themselves and others. Constantly pushing lies that lead uninformed people to believe there's crazy gunman on every corner waiting to kill them approaches that line. Consider that falsely yelling FIRE in a theater itself is the general standard, not whether anyone was actually injured as a result of it. If all people make it safely out of the theater and there was no fire, does that mean the 'yeller' didn't commit a crime of reckless endangerment or can't be sued for psychological trauma?

 

[Zippyjuan]

A lawsuit about 9 11 media cover-up was won in court.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...vader-refused-pay-BBC-covered-facts-9-11.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hI5lEZaHCaI

Actually the guy lost that case.

District Judge Stephen Nicholls said: 'This is not a public inquiry into 9/11. This is an offence under section 363 of the Communications Act.'
He said he had difficulty sitting in the magistrates’ court as he 'did not believe he had the power to rule under the terrorism act'.

He said: 'Even if I accept the evidence you say, this court has no power to create a defence in the manner which you put forward.'

Sentencing, Judge Nicholls said: 'Mr Rooke puts the basis of his defence under Section 15 of the Terrorism Act, effectively asking the court to find the BBC is a terrorist organisation and that if he continues to pay them he himself is committing a criminal offence.

'I have explained to Mr Rooke even if I were to accept his evidence I would be unable to find a defence".

 

[PRB]

Your own words:
"Yeah, free speech is a bitch, lying is not a crime".

But actually it can be if it directly leads to people acting in a manner that endangers themselves and others.

Fair point, which is really saying, if your words directly lead to people acting in a criminal manner, it's not a question of whether you lied, it's a question of whether you're accountable, and how much. Lying per se is not a crime, nor is speaking the truth.

Constantly pushing lies that lead uninformed people to believe there's crazy gunman on every corner waiting to kill them approaches that line. Consider that falsely yelling FIRE in a theater itself is the general standard, not whether anyone was actually injured as a result of it.

No, you need actual injury, no harm no victim.

If all people make it safely out of the theater and there was no fire, does that mean the 'yeller' didn't commit a crime of reckless endangerment or can't be sued for psychological trauma?

Correct, psychological trauma is a scam to get government benefits and for government to tax innocent people out of sympathy. There's no scientific evidence that anybody has suffered psycho trauma, when this was exposed DSM changed the name to PTSD. But as we know, just as calling global warming doesn't make climate change true, nor does calling Gender Identity Disorder Gender Dysphoria doesn't make it less of a disorder, using words to confuse people won't change the facts.

Lincoln said it right : How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.
There's no definitely way to prove a person "suffered" psychological trauma that can't be faked. Suffering emotionally is purely subjective, only physical injuries are provable and actionable. When you start making injuries anything but physical, you're opening the door for Fascism and thought crimes, this is the same justification for criminalizing stalking and drunk driving, NO VICTIM NO CRIME. PERIOD.

Since we're on the topic of trauma, 9/11 and scam. Here's it is. 3 birds one stone.
http://nypost.com/2014/02/24/more-to-be-charged-in-911-social-security-disability-scam/

9/11 didn't happen, trauma didn't happen, and scams happened. These people pretended to be traumatized so they can live on freeloading. Sham and shame.

 

[PRB]

Actually the guy lost that case.

he lost the case because the bad guys have more money!!!!!

 

[devil21]

No, you need actual injury, no harm no victim.
...................
Correct, psychological trauma is a scam

Good to know that PRB/Zippy sockpuppet thinks intentionally psychologically tormenting people is not a crime (criminal) or a cause for damage (civil). Shill status confirmed again.

 

[PRB]

Good to know that PRB thinks intentionally psychologically tormenting people is not a crime (criminal) or a cause for damage (civil). Shill status confirmed again.

You believe the government has business deciding what people can or can't do without proof of any physical injury? and I'm the shill?

 

[devil21]

You believe the government has business deciding what people can or can't do without proof of any physical injury? and I'm the shill?

First, the main issue is whether there are grounds for a lawsuit, which is a civil matter, and not directly about the government deciding anything, other than being litigated in a court of law. Second, only a psychopathic degenerate would view humans as nothing more than physical bodies, which you clearly do. Hmm....I'm trying to remember what group of people think the average person is nothing but a head of cattle......it's on the tip of tongue. Help me out PRB?

Third, yes you are the shill. And you're not a very good one.

 

[Zippyjuan]

Good to know that PRB/Zippy sockpuppet thinks intentionally psychologically tormenting people is not a crime (criminal) or a cause for damage (civil). Shill status confirmed again.

Examples of torture I have supported?

 

[phill4paul]

Examples of torture I have supported?

Your positively rainbow and unicorns presentations of the the state of the economy? Now that's torturous. And the proof is in your sig.

 

[devil21]

Examples of torture I have supported?

I can name at least a couple you try to engage in on this forum. Lord only knows what you do in real life.

 

[PRB]

I can name at least a couple you try to engage in on this forum. Lord only knows what you do in real life.

So let's see some.

*gets popcorn*

 

[PRB]

First, the main issue is whether there are grounds for a lawsuit, which is a civil matter, and not directly about the government deciding anything, other than being litigated in a court of law.

That is correct, the government decides what is actionable, which is another way of saying the government in effect decides what rights you have to sue, or what rights you have. Regardless of whether we like it. To answer whether something is actionable, we msut first see if something was done, seeing as I believe psycho trauma is made up, I wouldn't find anything based on psychotrauma to be actionable or compensation worthy.

Second, only a psychopathic degenerate would view humans as nothing more than physical bodies, which you clearly do.

I'll change my mind if you can prove otherwise.

Hmm....I'm trying to remember what group of people think the average person is nothing but a head of cattle......it's on the tip of tongue. Help me out PRB?

Intellectually honest scientists.

Third, yes you are the shill. And you're not a very good one.

What can I say to convince you otherwise?

 

[devil21]

That is correct, the government decides what is actionable, which is another way of saying the government in effect decides what rights you have to sue, or what rights you have. Regardless of whether we like it. To answer whether something is actionable, we msut first see if something was done, seeing as I believe psycho trauma is made up, I wouldn't find anything based on psychotrauma to be actionable or compensation worthy.

Im not an anarchist so yes I think a state government does have a role in determining what is actionable and what is not. Fortunately, most states have determined that intentionally inflicting mental duress is actionable.

I'll change my mind if you can prove otherwise.

You obviously view other humans as nothing more than physical bodies. I have nothing to prove. You proved it yourself with your own statements.

Intellectually honest scientists.

Nope, that's not the one. Though many in the "psychiatric" business are members of the group Im thinking of.

What can I say to convince you otherwise?

Absolutely nothing. Your statements and circular arguments give you away, among other things.

 

[PRB]

Im not an anarchist so yes I think a state government does have a role in determining what is actionable and what is not. Fortunately, most states have determined that intentionally inflicting mental duress is actionable.

The same government which believes gays and women should be equal, sounds like you have no problem with expanding government for liberal and egalitarian purposes and especially that which perpetuates scams like mental duress which can't be proven.

You obviously view other humans as nothing more than physical bodies. I have nothing to prove. You proved it yourself with your own statements.

I admit that I believe humans are nothing more than physical bodies, have you either a counter argument and proof to the contrary?

If you think there's something wrong with believing humans are "nothing more than physical bodies", I'm interested to hear what you believe and why.

Nope, that's not the one. Though many in the "psychiatric" business are members of the group Im thinking of.

Psychiatric people are exactly the ones which believe there's such a thing as mental distress, duress, trauma and all those other lies. I'm on the side of intellectually honest scientists who do not buy that shit.

Absolutely nothing. Your statements and circular arguments give you away, among other things.

Ok, at least you've admitted that you've made up your mind.

 

[devil21]

^^^^^^
You must have forgotten what forum you're on. I can't imagine Ron Paul advocating intentionally causing psychological duress to others as harmless, supporting a notion that people are just cattle, and that "intellectually honest" scientists think psychological duress (such as torture) is a-ok because psychological duress doesn't exist. Perhaps you would be more comfy in a neocon forum, where torture and disregard for human life is more acceptable?

 

[PRB]

^^^^^^
You must have forgotten what forum you're on. I can't imagine Ron Paul advocating intentionally causing psychological duress to others as harmless, supporting a notion that people are just cattle, and that "intellectually honest" scientists think psychological duress (such as torture) is a-ok because psychological duress doesn't exist. Perhaps you would be more comfy in a neocon forum, where torture and disregard for human life is more acceptable?

Back up a little, how about you start by telling me how I am wrong. Do tell what humans are other than physical bodies.

 

[devil21]

I won't assist your intelligence gathering any further. I'm sure my file is already quite extensive. Shalom to you and yours though.

 

[osan]

This just in... The body of William Brandon Shanley was found this morning in a dumpster. Cause of death is unknown at this time, but police say there was no foul play.