Recent comments in /f/nottheonion

vlsdo t1_jayd5oz wrote

Nobody said anything about letting people off. But surely mentioning the motivation for their crime is relevant to the case and should be admitted in court. Otherwise why even have courts in the first place? Why not just dispatch justice Judge Dredd style, where the judge decides on his own the guilt and punishment for any action?

11

mcwobby t1_jaycube wrote

Chicken Big Mac is already on the menu in many parts of the world too, that article mentions the UK. Middle East has had it for over a decade I think, fairly sure I’ve seen it India and Australia has had it for a least a year or two and I think it was run as a promo item before that, so did this Toronto guy come up with the original version or just the Canadian one?

4

magicseadog t1_jaya57d wrote

I guess you don't understand how laws and courts work? Judges can't let people off because they are sympathetic with their cause. They adjudicate on the law. These people are not even helping to fight climate change. Climate change needs work and ingenuity to solve.

If these people wanted to do something they would go study and then help, rather than inconvienncing those of us who are working on solutions and destroying art.

−18

OneLongjumping4022 t1_jay6kd9 wrote

Their motivation for stating the true and honest reason for their actions while in court is ALL IMPORTANT - the judge spent quite a while discussing what their motivation in telling the truth could be.

Their motivation for protesting, however, is absolutely never to be spoken out loud, and besides it's completely beside the point! Why would the motivation behind a.crime even matter, duh? Said. The. Judge.

33