Oscar Pistorius: pay your dues!

First topic message reminder :

Finally, law and order comes to the lawless land of South Africa. An appeals court has termed the 6-year sentence for murder as "disgraceful". Oscar Pistorius brutally shot his beautiful, and beloved girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp, after an argument. He was originally sentenced to 5-years. But:

People wrote:...In its decision, the five-judge Supreme Court of Appeal ordered Pistorius — originally sentenced to six years in prison for murdering Reeva Steenkamp — to spend 13 years and five months behind bars, according to the Associated Press, the BBC and The New York Times.

The new ruling reportedly bring Pistroius’ sentence in line with the recommended minimum of 15 years for murder in South Africa, minus the time he has already served either in prison or under house arrest.

According to the AP, the appellate court’s decision is likely the final development in Pistorius’ case. It began not long after he fatally fired four times on Steenkamp, a law grad and model, on Valentine’s Day 2013, shooting her through a closed bathroom door in his Pretoria, South Africa, home.

Pistorius, 31, has always maintained he believed there was an intruder that night, but prosecutors said they suspected he was motivated by an earlier argument with his 29-year-old girlfriend of less than a year. At his first trial, they argued that he was gun-crazy and temperamental.

The shooting came months after the 2012 Summer Olympics at which Pistorius — an amputee runner nicknamed the “Blade Runner,” for the prosthetic legs he used to compete — was an international star. After several successful Paralympic Games, he competed at the Olympics, a first for a double-amputee.

His arrest and trial made months of headlines around the world. Though he was initially convicted of culpable homicide and served one year in prison, prosecutors appealed and he was found guilty of murder in 2015.

Likewise, with Friday’s decision, prosecutors have successfully appealed his initial sentence, which the trial judge reportedly attributed, in part, to Pistorius’ attempts at a personal apology to Steenkamp’s family.

Shoulda gotten a bullet to the temple, but this is a little bit better.

Smelly said...

'... I don't discriminate against blacks, so i don't need to stop doing it nor do i need to make up for anything...'


Same goes for me!!!


I was just going to post the same thing!!!

Tommy Monk wrote:

Smelly said...

'... I don't discriminate against blacks, so i don't need to stop doing it nor do i need to make up for anything...'


Same goes for me!!!


I was just going to post the same thing!!!

Exactly why should we??

I didn't have slaves, I have done nothing to hinder a black person from going to school or getting a job.

Why is their lack of ambition my fault, or your fault??

It's isn't, so fuck em if they want to be lazy and listen to quills bullshit.

Not my problem, not my guilt

sb wrote:I didn't have slaves, I have done nothing to hinder a black person from going to school or getting a job.

But you are reaping the benefits of slavery, or apartheid. One possibility would be to amend inheritance laws, making all assets revert to the state to do what it wants. That way, one doesn't get to reap the benefits of those who did own slaves or enjoy privilege.

I've got other ideas. But for now, that's something on which I'd like to hear comments.

Original Quill wrote:

sb wrote:I didn't have slaves, I have done nothing to hinder a black person from going to school or getting a job.

But you are reaping the benefits of slavery, or apartheid.  One possibility would be to amend inheritance laws, making all assets revert to the state to do what it wants.  That way, one doesn't get to reap the benefits of those who did own slaves or enjoy privilege.

I've got other ideas.  But for now, that's something on which I'd like to hear comments.

presumably the blacks wont get to benefit from it either or is this assets seizure policy only applicable to whites??

does there happen to be a statute of limitations on this legacy guilt you seem determine to punish all white people for or is it indefinite??

you know this assets seizure policy was done in Zimbabwe with the farms right?? the black war vets (some as young as 12), turned up and took back the farms the whites stole from them several dozen years previous.

the farms turned fallow and fell into ruin, the farm hands lost their jobs and zimbabwe started to starve because well, you know?? there was no one to farm the land as they had been macheted to death, but on the bright side at least no one was benefiting from slavery, no one was benefiting from anything at all..............apart from Mugabe and his government.

but how will it work??

when a person is born and grows up, goes to school, then takes out a student loan and saddles himself with debt to get to go to university, studies hard gets a job, works hard, saves his money, gets married, gets a mortgage, has some kids and slowly but surely over the years he builds up his wealth. Then on his death bed an IRS agent walks with lots of apologies and condolences but still must insist the family hand over the keys to the house the cars and the bank account, and while they are at it might as well hand over their clothes as well??

is that the plan?? and you imprison or execute those who resist??

sounds like a real socialist utopia, determining certain people to be second class citizens then seizing their assets to give to other people deemed to be a higher class of citizen.

mmmmmmmm that's sounds a bit familiar , has it been tried somewhere before???

i take it you will be first in line to volunteer to surrender your assets, seeing as how you were assistant attorney general and all, i imagine you must have acquired quite a bit of personal wealth and privilege

so after you quill, age before beauty.

according to quill



this man ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ is a benefactor of slavery and using his white privilege



to keep this man ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ down

You can't generalize from specifics, Russ. I thought you were learning this. Guess not.

Sure we can find poor white folks, and successful black folks. But tell me this: what is the norm? When you look at a board room, how many black females do you see?

sb wrote:presumably the blacks wont get to benefit from it either or is this assets seizure policy only applicable to whites??

The asset reversion would apply to all. No free ride for children of the wealthy. Hard work for everyone.

It builds character. Look at those who had a free ride in their lives--Donald Trump, for example. Look how it has affected his mental state. Had he had the benefit of hard work, he would not have turned out in such a demented way.

sb wrote:you know this assets seizure policy was done in Zimbabwe with the farms right?? the black war vets (some as young as 12), turned up and took back the farms the whites stole from them several dozen years previous.

the farms turned fallow and fell into ruin, the farm hands lost their jobs and zimbabwe started to starve because well, you know?? there was no one to farm the land as they had been macheted to death, but on the bright side at least no one was benefiting from slavery, no one was benefiting from anything at all..............apart from Mugabe and his government.

That's a different problem, Russ.  It's not surprise if mismanagement of assets occurs, even in government.  What are you suggesting about inheritance conveyance that prevents driving a farm or business into the ground?  Seen it happen plenty of times.

So, don't make up. or assume false correlations.  A good asset management program cures all.

Let's get back to the question of equity.  What's wrong with prohibiting all inheritance, so that everyone gets a fair start at the beginning of the race?  Conservatives tell us that hard work is good for the body and soul.  Look at Trump...drove five businesses into bankruptcy...same as Zimbabwe.  If he had a proper start in life, with no inheritance, he might well have turned out to be an industrious contributor to society.

sb wrote:when a person is born and grows up, goes to school, then takes out a student loan and saddles himself with debt to get to go to university, studies hard gets a job, works hard, saves his money, gets married, gets a mortgage, has some kids and slowly but surely over the years he builds up his wealth. Then on his death bed an IRS agent walks with lots of apologies and condolences but still must insist the family hand over the keys to the house the cars and the bank account, and while they are at it might as well hand over their clothes as well??

That's one version of it.  The IRS agent need not apologize.  It would happen across the board.  Everyone gets a fair chance.  The point is no aristocracy is permitted to arise.  It's equality across the board.

sb wrote:is that the plan?? and you imprison or execute those who resist??

No need to do anything to the ersatz heir.  The property goes into federal receivership, new ownership is recorded at the County Clerk's.  Good heavens...no one needs be rude about it.

sb wrote:sounds like a real socialist utopia...

Socialism is not state ownership, but a society in which the producers own their own tools.  Who says the state maintains ownership of the assets?  So far, the state is just a broker, and the asset goes to the highest bidder.

sb wrote:determining certain people to be second class citizens then seizing their assets to give to other people deemed to be a higher class of citizen.

"Second class citizens"?  "Seizing their assets"?  "Higher class citizens"?  Who said anything about any of those.  Why is a person a "second class citizen" because he isn't allowed to inherit daddy's millions?  Who is "seizing assets"?  The assets would rightfully revert to the state; one can't seize what belongs to the state already.

As far as "higher class citizen" is concerned, the asset goes to the highest bidder.  Isn't that the way it is now?  It's your inheritance system that is socialist by putting the asset in the hands of the incompetent and undeserving.  It may be tough love, but it's merit based.

Original Quill wrote:

sb wrote:presumably the blacks wont get to benefit from it either or is this assets seizure policy only applicable to whites??

The asset reversion would apply to all.  No free ride for children of the wealthy.  Hard work for everyone.

It builds character.  Look at those who had a free ride in their lives--Donald Trump, for example.  Look how it has affected his mental state.  Had he had the benefit of hard work, he would not have turned out in such a demented way.

I'm not sure about that Quill. I think Trump is just plain crazy, wealth or no wealth.

Original Quill wrote:You can't generalize from specifics, Russ.  I thought you were learning this.  Guess not.

Sure we can find poor white folks, and successful black folks.  But tell me this: what is the norm?  When you look at a board room, how many black females do you see?

well that's just relative isn't it???

how many white female presidents do you see in Africa??

Original Quill wrote:

sb wrote:you know this assets seizure policy was done in Zimbabwe with the farms right?? the black war vets (some as young as 12), turned up and took back the farms the whites stole from them several dozen years previous.

the farms turned fallow and fell into ruin, the farm hands lost their jobs and zimbabwe started to starve because well, you know?? there was no one to farm the land as they had been macheted to death, but on the bright side at least no one was benefiting from slavery, no one was benefiting from anything at all..............apart from Mugabe and his government.

That's a different problem, Russ.  It's not surprise if mismanagement of assets occurs, even in government.  What are you suggesting about inheritance conveyance that prevents driving a farm or business into the ground?  Seen it happen plenty of times.

So, don't make up. or assume false correlations.  A good asset management program cures all.

Let's get back to the question of equity.  What's wrong with prohibiting all inheritance, so that everyone gets a fair start at the beginning of the race?  Conservatives tell us that hard work is good for the body and soul.  Look at Trump...drove five businesses into bankruptcy...same as Zimbabwe.  If he had a proper start in life, with no inheritance, he might well have turned out to be an industrious contributor to society.

no quill its not a different problem its the EXACT solution you are proposing, government assets from those who only have them because of white imperialism/slavery and redistributing them to those who suffered under the above.

they weren't taken from white farmers and given to black farmers who then failed to produce due to lack of government support, they were taken from white farmers and given to black war veterans as reparations for past wrongs

exactly what your assets seizure program is designed to do - take from those who benefited from slavery/ oppression of the blacks and redistribute them to the oppressed

FYI ,mugabe had a proper start in life and didn't inherit anything

no aristocracy can arise??

you mean apart from the 1 percenters in government who will be sitting pretty on a mountain of seized assets.

i notice you still haven't said if you will be first in line to hand over your inheritance??

smelly-bandit wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

That's a different problem, Russ.  It's not surprise if mismanagement of assets occurs, even in government.  What are you suggesting about inheritance conveyance that prevents driving a farm or business into the ground?  Seen it happen plenty of times.

So, don't make up. or assume false correlations.  A good asset management program cures all.

Let's get back to the question of equity.  What's wrong with prohibiting all inheritance, so that everyone gets a fair start at the beginning of the race?  Conservatives tell us that hard work is good for the body and soul.  Look at Trump...drove five businesses into bankruptcy...same as Zimbabwe.  If he had a proper start in life, with no inheritance, he might well have turned out to be an industrious contributor to society.

sb wrote:no  quill its not a different problem its the EXACT solution you are proposing, government assets from those who only have them because of white imperialism/slavery and redistributing them to those who suffered under the above.

If you misunderstood me, let's be very clear right now: I am not advocating mismanagement of assets.  All right?  Settled!  

Ok, let's move on...the asset would go to anyone who purchased it.  The government would only broker the asset.  That's a surer way of putting the asset in productive hands, than giving it to an irresponsible trust baby.

sb wrote:they weren't taken from white farmers and given to black farmers who then failed to produce due to lack of government support, they were taken from white farmers and given to black war veterans as reparations for past wrongs

The assets shouldn't be 'given' to anyone.  They should be sold to someone who will put them to good use.  Remember, I'm not defending Zimbabwe.  I have no particular interest in any African nation in this discussion.  I'm talking about a system that does away with inheritance.

Russ, stop putting up straw men, and start dealing with the issues of the discussion.

sb wrote:exactly what your assets seizure program is designed to do - take from those who benefited from slavery/ oppression of the blacks and redistribute them to the oppressed

It's not a seizure program.  It's the asset reverting to the state, as temporary holder, for redistribution to another productive owner.  If the state wants to hold the asset, it can.  Like the military.  But the state would have to have good reason for holding onto the asset.  Sell it and make the money.  It's just a more productive form of redistribution...might save taxes too.

sb wrote:FYI ,mugabe had a proper start in life and didn't inherit anything  

Who cares?

third time you have avoided saying if you will be surrendering your assets to the state

smelly-bandit wrote:
third time you have avoided saying if you will be surrendering your assets to the state

Everyone would. No special people...that's how the evil started.

This subject is not about you or me. It's about a program for equitable passage of assets. It should be of no interest who occupies what position in the process. Address the discussion.

Why would you advocate the inheritance system, if you would?

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:
third time you have avoided saying if you will be surrendering your assets to the state

Everyone would.  No special people...that's how the evil started.

This subject is not about you or me.  It's about a program for equitable passage of assets.  It should be of no interest who occupies what position in the process.  Address the discussion.

Why would you advocate the inheritance system, if you would?

i am addressing it, Im testing your theory by testing your convictions

are you going to surrender your assets to the US government, as in the one that exist in reality not the (DPRK) Democratic Peoples Republic of Kalifornia you keep talking about??

are you willing to live by your ideals??

Asked and answered.

https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/ppzevg/hey-v12n5

Also...


'...In April 1775, two days after the American War of Independence began, a notice appeared in the Virginia Gazette offering rewards for the return of 10 runaways. Two were "Negro slaves", but the other eight were white servants, including Thomas Pearce, a 20-year-old Bristol joiner, and William Webster, a middle-aged Scottish brick-maker. Whether they were ever found remains a mystery; almost nothing is known about them but their names. But their irate master was to become very famous indeed, for the man pursuing his absconding servants was called George Washington...'


Telegraph article source

Tommy Monk wrote:https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/ppzevg/hey-v12n5

  And thus slavery never existed.  

Now let's move on to the poor...how can we fook them over?  Maybe tax cuts for the rich?  Remove benefits for the middle and low income groups so it doesn't increase the deficit?  A little upward wealth redistribution would be nice.

Try reading the article properly...

Tommy Monk wrote:Try reading the article properly...

I did. I read it insightfully.

Original Quill wrote:Asked and answered.

Wow wow wewow

Someone is panicking, calm down Quill, it's just a question.

Are you going to write your family out of your will and leave your entire state to the US government??

smelly-bandit wrote:

Original Quill wrote:Asked and answered.

Wow wow wewow

Someone is panicking, calm down Quill, it's just a question.

Are you going to write your family out of your will and leave your entire state to the US government??

Panic? You call a three-word dismissal of you, panic? We've finished with this subject. You have been left sputtering and repeating yourself.

I might run a victory lap with some, but with you it's all to ordinary to let loose.

Original Quill wrote:

smelly-bandit wrote:

Wow wow wewow

Someone is panicking, calm down Quill, it's just a question.

Are you going to write your family out of your will and leave your entire state to the US government??

Panic?  You call a three-word dismissal of you, panic?  We've finished with this subject.  You have been left sputtering and repeating yourself.

I might run a victory lap with some, but with you it's all to ordinary to let loose.

finished??

i havent even started, youre the one running away with your wealth and your white privileged that no amount of legacy guilt over the slave trade is gonna make you give up, your kids are going to have a nice fat inheritance to set them up

just like trump, though not as rich unless you were really good at skimming off the top.

pathetic, you cant even commit to your own ideas

what a dreamer quill is

what a pointless impractical idea

so a guy makes a fair packet and has the usual big house etc

so he then retires and sells the big house

buys a small place somewhere not to dear

and then gifts the extra capital to his kids etc

same with his savings and any other worthwhile assets


he may not even gift the money openly, he may give cash ....or items

if challenged where the cash went his reply

"well I'm getting on a bit so I spent it a boozing and a whoreing and well you know generally having a good time."

Lord Foul wrote:what a dreamer quill is

what a pointless impractical idea

so a guy makes a fair packet and has the usual big house etc

so he then retires and sells the big house

buys a small place somewhere not to dear

and then gifts the extra capital to his kids etc

same with his savings  and any other worthwhile assets


he may not even gift the money openly, he may give cash ....or items

if challenged where the cash went his reply

"well I'm getting on a bit so I spent it a boozing and a whoreing and well you know generally having a good time."

If you've gotta pay for it, best keep your fly zipped.