Seems like a pretty cut and dry case. The movie is called 12 Angry Men, not 6. Would be a far shorter film.
this post was submitted on 15 Jun 2026
61 points (100.0% liked)
News
38055 readers
1333 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
So by your argument, no women are allowed on juries because the movie is called 12 Angry Men?
Yes. Furthermore, being in a chipper mood is grounds for immediate expulsion at any time.
bring your contempt, or the court will bring theirs
It's becoming clear that the laws in this country are being set by criminals like this through manipulation of the courts and laws in this country, and lawyers concocting unethical arguments that they know are wrong, but use technicalities to eschew any guilt. The whole thing stinks, if the courts worked how they told us they worked we would be in a totally different situation, but the courts are a fucking circus full of clowns
This is a huge deal IMO. Where's the floor on this kind of thing? 3? 2? It's the states job to convince the jury, unanimously, that someone is guilty. Clearly it's to their advantage to have as few people as possible.
Edit: key point about unanimous decisions
look, cops only arrest criminals
why waste tax dollars on trials
If this argument succeeds, I would love to see the same logic applied to the second amendment (specifically the word "arms") just for shits and giggles.
But don't get me wrong, I know that logical consistency doesn't apply to the second amendment. It would just be fun to see someone try.
I would love to see the same logic applied to the second amendment (specifically the word “arms”) just for shits and giggles.
Illegal to own just one gun. (That would be an 'arm', not 'arms'.) You must own zero or at least two. First time gun buyers must buy them in pairs, although it's advised to buy at least three, just in case something happens to one of them and would otherwise leave you with an illegal number of guns.
It's the right to bear arms. So it's illegal to carry just one gun at a time.