Another Time When Amy Bishop Should Have Been Charged

Submitted by redwoodwriter on Tue, 2010-02-16 03:28

Article here. It now surfaces that Amy Bishop pulled a shotgun on a Tom Petttigrew some 20+ years ago. She threatened him and his friend with the gun, and was later surrounded by and arrested by the police. Again she was given the pass, and no charges were pressed. How many times do we give women "the pass"? It turns out that the criminal justice system gave this woman the pass again and again. And now three are dead at the University of Alabama, and two more critically wounded and in the hospital. Is this what comes from letting women get away with things, not holding them responsible for their actions, not treating them as adults? This is, after all, what modern feminism is advocating, that women have all the power to do things like this, but none of the responsibilities that go along with being an adult. Note that this story also indicates that the shooting of her brother was probably intentional, because she is, in this story, looking for a get-away car.

From the story:

"Shortly after fatally shooting her brother in 1986, Amy Bishop held two men at gunpoint and demanded a getaway car at an auto repair shop near her family's Braintree home, according to one of the men involved.

Carrying a shotgun by her side, a 21-year-old Bishop walked intently across a car lot into the adjacent storefront, where she began searching for car keys. Coming down from the second floor, she was heading toward the garage when she ran into Tom Pettigrew and a friend, who had spotted her in the parking lot and came to investigate.

Her gun hit me in the chest," Pettigrew, 45, recalled from his Quincy apartment. "I yelled, 'What are you doing?' and she screamed at me to put my hands up. So I put my hands up."

On Friday, Bishop, a biology professor at the University of Alabama, allegedly opened fire at a faculty meeting, killing three colleagues and wounding three others. Investigators soon discovered that Bishop had killed her younger brother in 1986 with a shotgun, a shooting that was ruled accidental."

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

This story is a bona-fide example of the pussy pass in action.

This would be a great time for letters to the editor asking WHEN we are finally going to have women responsible for their actions.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Demonspawn on Tue, 2010-02-16 18:18

So. let's see if I have this straight...

She got in a fight with dad and he left the house to get away from her
She grabbed a gun and killed her brother
Mom was home but no details on her
She fled the house with the gun
She threatened three more people,assaulting one of them with the gun attempting to steal a car

she was not charged with a single crime

Yep 100% pussy pass there. No wonder she figured she could shoot up the staff meeting at work twenty years later.

Anyone care to wager how many felonies the 1986 incident would have resulted in if it had been the brother who drove mom from the house, shot his sister, threatened and assaulted people while attempting to flee?

I would wager it would be something like:

1 count of first degree murder
4 counts of threats with a deadly weapon
1 count of assault against mom even if he did not hit her
1 count of fleeing the scene of a crime
3 or so charges related to the attempt at stealing the car
Probably some menacing or carrying a weapon in public charges
6 or so charges related to unlicensed use of, transportation of etc.. a firearm
A few counts of lying to the police

So you know, about 20 or so charges if the genders were reversed. Plus, guilty on count one with a life sentence at the trial

Do we need a violent offender registry now?

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Paragon on Tue, 2010-02-16 21:20

In my opinion, the odds are in her favor that if she plays the Not Guilty By Reason Of Temporary Insanity card she will get off! She has political pull somewhere else besides what's between her legs or she would have been imprisoned somewhere along the line some time ago.

I know this sounds pessimistic and cynical but these are interesting times we are living in and they are getting more interesting.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Luek on Wed, 2010-02-17 13:38

Luek said: "In my opinion, the odds are in her favor that if she plays the Not Guilty By Reason Of Temporary Insanity card she will get off! She has political pull somewhere else besides what's between her legs...

and now here's this from the Boston Hearld:

"A family source said Bishop, a mother of four children - the youngest a third-grade boy - was a far-left political extremist who was “obsessed” with President Obama to the point of being off-putting."

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by MR on Wed, 2010-02-17 16:50

Beyond this being a gender issue, which I believe it is primarily, Bishop may have gotten the pass on her crimes due to some halo effect related to her being a Harvard PhD. In this culture, many of us have such incredible reverence and worship for people who have gone to Harvard, that we let them get away with things that they should not be getting away with. It will be interesting to see whether she does get "the pass" and why.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by redwoodwriter on Wed, 2010-02-17 17:50

Cliff Doerkson of the Chicago Reader has linked to this posting:

When the Perp Is a Prof
Everybody’s crowding to get inside the head of alleged Huntsville campus shooter Amy Bishop.
February 18, 2010
By Cliff Doerksen

In summary, he's trying to say that fringe groups are pointing the accusatory finger of injustice about this story, and he lumps MRAs in with fringe groups.

______________________________
John Dias
Editor, Misandry Review

Visit my Facebook page

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by johndias on Fri, 2010-02-19 01:21

there's no such thing as bad publicity. I'm glad he linked to this site. Maybe they'll be a few more open eyes.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Hunchback on Fri, 2010-02-19 18:21

...And his brevity in his reference to us, lack of counter argument to our positioning of her as an example of female propensity for violence, and general lack of denigration in his reference to us shows that despite his view of MRAs as a fringe group he does not see our ideas as being completely without merit.

Is our positioning of her as a counter point to media demonization of males politically motivated. Sure it is. But its getting harder and harder every day to ignore the fact that there is a bias in the law in favor of females, and the only way to change the law is though political action.

In some of his references to other opinions of this case he went out of his way to counter the argument presented by that group, and in some cases where he did not present a counter argument, he was very denigrating in his reference to that groups opinion or the group in general.

At least with us, his reference is short, sweet, and to the point without his opinion thrown in one way or the other.

In my humble opinion we came off as one of the fringe groups that were not in his view completely out to lunch. I also appreciate the fact that despite the majority of our membership falling into the 'conservative' camp, he did not simply lump us in with his references to other far right wing groups.

I liked his piece personally, and he's right that at the end of the day we do not know all the facts of this case and are merely expressing our opinion.

At least we got referenced, mst of the time we are ignored completely. So like Hunchback said, if it leads to a few more eyes on these pages great. That just means that our ideas are becoming more mainstream every day

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Paragon on Fri, 2010-02-19 20:17