There it is. That fucker killed four people and he got probation.

Affluenza kid then. Happy?

And the man who killed his child whose mother gets more prison time for child endangerment.

From my limited understanding of this case she didn’t shoot him while he was threatening or attacking her so stand your ground wouldn’t in general apply (though I don’t know all versions of the law) as it requires an active aggressor.

Stand your Ground is for white men. There was a prosecutor in Florida (IIRC) who explicitly said that the law shouldn’t count for domestic violence victims.

And the father who accidently shot his son to death at a range faces no repercussions. And the hundreds of parents who leave their children alone in a room with a loaded gun face no repercussions. And parents of children who kill their siblings with their guns face no repercussions.

Can someone please explain to me why many states are totally cool with Stand Your Ground laws/using deadly force to “prevent death or great bodily harm” but this little girl faces life in prison for shooting someone who repeatedly threatened to kill his entire family with that very gun?

Why would she be tried as an adult, though? It’s not like she was 3 months from her 18th birthday- she was 14 years old.

32 year old Ryan Lochte = just boys being boys

It probably isn’t being contemplated. As far as I can tell, all that’s been said is that IF she is tried as an adult (which would require the State’s Attorney to move to have her tried as an adult and the court to actually grant that motion) and IF she is found guilty of aggravated murder (rather than a lesser offense…

Weeelllllllll... The reason charges were brought is because she shot him while he was sleeping, so premeditation is key there. I think it’s pretty clear she tried everything she could before she came to the conclusion that killing the guy was her family’s only way out. We have laws, vengeance isn’t the answer, can’t…

What. The. Actual. Fuck.

Oh God. Pussygate.

Well said. There’s nothing in there one wouldn’t have expected - and most is considerably better (than feared). And you’re right: she’s running against the three stooges.

Right? Let’s juxtapose these two breaking news stories:

it’s really not bad. at all. she likes trade, which is really no secret. nothing she’s saying is that terrible. It’s pretty moderate shit.

Just how radical did you expect her to get for a bunch of finance bros? She was getting paid to tell them they’re all the prettiest girl in the room, that’s it.

It’s really... nothing. It’s not as intense as her public persona but it’s not radically different. She’s catering to her audience without fundamentally changing who she is. I don’t get why she was so against publicizing these except then she couldn’t use them again.

.... Why are you surprised she fought so hard against it? She wasn’t trying to hide what was in the speeches, she was fighting against the stupid double standard that had strong undertones of “how dare the uppity lady get paid lots of money to speak to a group who is willing to pay her lots of money to hear words come…

I mean, if these are the the worst they’ve got...this is...not that big a deal? I dunno; I know my fellow millennials REALLY hate that she is like vaguely moderate on certain shit (sigh, but I’m not gonna get into that rn) but after today’s pussy-gate is this really gonna matter? The choices are a qualified candidate…