It's a very good question. Isn't it?
Well, this seemingly unrelated story might be a clue:
Jurors heard the suspect has autism and ADHD and has been given a stress toy on the dock to help him during the trial.Who's the victim, to the State?
Jurors heard the suspect has autism and ADHD and has been given a stress toy on the dock to help him during the trial.Who's the victim, to the State?
3 comments:
Liberalism in a nutshell - oops, better make that differently-sane shell - someone running a sandwich bar is required to keep mountains of paperwork documenting their hygiene policy but an off-meds schizo has the right to run round the street howling that the demons are EVERYWHERE!
That's bad enough but when the inevitable happens, suddenly it turns out that the people we aren't allowed to discriminate against 'just because they live in a non-traditional reality' can't possibly be held accountable for killing someone.
Apparently, being cray-cray doesn't make people dangerous but it does make them kill people.
Making public the name or names of those authorising release may take the interests of the general public into account in future decisions of this kind. Oh look, the porcine air squadron has just gone past.
Penseivat
"Liberalism in a nutshell - oops, better make that differently-sane shell..."
SNORK!
"Making public the name or names of those authorising release may take the interests of the general public into account in future decisions of this kind. "
Holding them PERSONALLY financially responsible would, too.
Post a Comment