That number is far too low.
this post was submitted on 18 Dec 2024
297 points (99.3% liked)
United States | News & Politics
2020 readers
436 users here now
Welcome to !usa@midwest.social, where you can share and converse about the different things happening all over/about the United States.
If you’re interested in participating, please subscribe.
Rules
Be respectful and civil. No racism/bigotry/hateful speech.
Post anything related to the United States.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Jury nullification will be a big issue.
I wouldn’t convict the guy of anything more than having an unlicensed gun.
The prosecutors will find ways to exclude all jurors under the age of 65.
Not going to happen. Jurors get very specific instructions to consider the charges, exactly what actions meet the criteria and are told to only consider the merit of the charges. It's all very solemn and the vast majority of people take it seriously. They'll find him guilty. Unless the BS terrorism charges blow it for the prosecution. We can hope.
They'll find him guilty because they'll tamper with the juries. You can guarantee that. Be it through bribery or threats that jury is going to know they better convict.
I tried to get a grand jury to nullify drug charges once. It was extremely depressing. Everyone was like "but we have to follow the rules. They told us."
Grand jury is simple majority. Everyone else voted to indict. Even the juror that was sleeping, snores and all, indicted on every charge.
No way. No way I'm letting a juror sleep through the process and then get to vote. I would have made such a huge deal about that shit. Fuck that dude.
Every time I brought anything up, like the guy sleeping, the injustice of sending people to jail for marijuana, the fact that they were asking us to indict someone for like "intent to use a gun in a crime" when all the cop said was they found a gun in the house, most of the people on the jury were like "come on! Shut up! We just want to go home!"
On a grand jury the defense has no role. The prosecutors don't really care so long as they're getting their indictments.
I think about this whenever a cop isn't indicted.
Acceptable?
More like "Based, I'd do the same thing too!"
You see sigma Luigi mewing in the mug shot? That guy's looksmaxing like a level nine rizzler no cap. He's in the Ohio backrooms now though. What the skibidi. Ws in the chat for Luigi.
Watersports for Luigi? If you insist…
Isn't this practically self-defense in the US?
41 percent
40 percent
The margin of error was 3 percentage points.
Man, I LOVE articles about surveys. So informative, and not at all misleading! /s
41 percent of adults under 30 consider the killing [acceptable]
more than the 40 percent in that demographic who consider it unacceptable.
68 percent of all respondents found the actions of the person who shot and killed Thompson unacceptable.
startling 24 percent of those aged 18-29 found it “somewhat acceptable,”
17 percent of that group found it completely acceptable.
22 percent of Democrats said they found the killing acceptable, compared to 16 percent of independents and 12 percent of Republicans.
The survey was conducted Dec. 11-13 among 1,000 registered voters. The margin of error was 3 percentage points.
When you strip out the randomly inserted bits of the story, that add zero context, it makes complete sense. Oh. Wait.
Edit: Where was that blurb from, OP? Ground just gives a list of similar articles and summary bullet points.
The Hill
You mean… people would just go and lie? On the internet? Stats are made up. I’ve not met a single person who says “yeah, the Thompson murder was not justified”
I’ve met them, but they’re all members of the elite, horrified that the masses are finally resorting to violence against them, especially a member of their own class being a traitor towards them.
Most people are horrified by violence and the fact that we’ve come to this point, but most are also ambivalent at worst about this guy being on the receiving end of the violence. He would have a lot more sympathy if he wasn’t the CEO of a health insurance company that mostly acts as an extortion and protection racket.
though i'm sure you also make a conscious effort to avoid the kind of people who love ceos
Only 41 percent?
58% say it's 10/10, would enjoy again!
The 1% disagree.
Ask stupid questions, get stupid answers.
The other 49%:
