|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by RandomMan on 06:58 PM June 20th, 2006 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
Police said that they have reason to believe that Victor Han left the van knowing that his wife was suicidal and that she had earlier threatened to harm herself and their two children.
So now a man is supposed to "go down with the ship" and intentionally put himself in harm's way because some neurotic, suicidal bitch wants to off herself and the kids? He's supposed to die too? It's now illegal for a man to prevent a woman from killing him?
Where are the hundreds of thousands of charges against women who cause thousands of male suicides annually by voluntarily divorcing men for a paycheck and denying men access to their own children?
The people who are prosecuting this man are sexist hypocrites.
If a man doesn't risk his life to take responsibility for the irresponsible acts of some deranged, homicidal bitch, he's a criminal?
I don't think so. The "justice" system just lost all credibility in my opinion.
If I were that man, and I were standing in front of a judge on such an asinine charge, having just lost my family due to the act of a murderous woman, I'd have a grand total of four words to say in the entire case:
"Fuck you, your honor".
What kind of sexist animals would arrest a man whose wife just killed herself and attempted to kill his children?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by n.j. on 08:33 PM June 20th, 2006 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
...can be found here: http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/427432p-360 428c.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by RandomMan on 05:33 AM June 21st, 2006 EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
Totally different issue, Dittohd. The mother in the case you linked was both a nurse and a mother, and had a legal duty on both counts to do everything possible to ensure that her dependent child didn't succumb to illness because the child was incompetent and dependent on her, both as a patient and as a child. Now the woman has to prove she did everything reasonably possible to ensure her kid's well being, i.e. that she dilligently carried out her duties in both roles.
As for this guy who's being charged with not allowing himself to be killed so an infinitely more valuable female human wouldn't die alone, since when does a man have a duty to ensure his psycho wife doesn't intentionally blow her own brains out? When you marry a woman, does she become your child? Does she have the same responsibility to the man?
If women are adults, they're responsible for their own actions. Period. If they want to be treated like grown-ups, they better start acting like adults sometime in the next few years, or men like me will take it upon themselves to treat them like the retarded infants they're apparently so eager to become.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by n.j. on 07:35 AM June 21st, 2006 EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
It had nothing to do with not letting himself to be killed though. He was driving the car, not her. She could only do it because he left.
But what strange times we live in becomes obvious when you read his lawyer stating that he had "no legal obligation to keep her from killing herself". Gee, we wouldn't have figured that one out. Time for an 'endangering the well being of a wife' law? Maybe I shouldn't give people ideas..
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Thundercloud on 01:14 PM June 21st, 2006 EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
If women want to ACT like children then I say we start TREATING them like children.
The first thing we should do is turn them over our knee and give them a sound spanking.
And to you femi-trolls that may read this and gasp and say that I'm "advocating violence against women" just go screw yourselves. How many of you have advocated castrating men. Threatening to spank a woman is NOTHING compared to the threat of castration, so whom really is advocating violence against whom...?
Besides knowing the way a lot of American women are they'd probably get off on a spanking, anyway.
GOD!
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Dittohd on 12:08 AM June 22nd, 2006 EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
|
>The mother in the case you linked was both a nurse and a mother, and had a legal duty on both counts to do everything possible to ensure that her dependent child didn't succumb to illness because the child was incompetent and dependent on her, both as a patient and as a child.
Meningitis is known to have a short gestation period and is often mistaken for other benign sickness in the beginning. The fact that this mother was a nurse means little. Hindsight is always 20/20 and having the government second-guessing all our decisions in life when things go wrong is ludicrous and untenable.
A nurse has nowhere near the medical expertise of a doctor yet you seem to be holding this woman to a higher standard than you would a doctor, assuming that you wouldn't advocate putting a doctor in jail if he misdiagnosed the same problem in one of his patients. Do you feel that it's OK for a doctor to misdiagnose a patient and have the patient die if the patient is not his child or spouse? If so, why? In fact, why shouldn't we hold a doctor to the same standards when treating a patient who's not a family member of his as someone who is his family?
If this mother had taken her child to a doctor and the doctor had misdiagnosed the problem, would you advocate putting him in jail? If not, why this mother?
By the way, children get many sicknesses when they're young because their immune systems haven't yet developed antibodies to the many diseases that assail our bodies daily. Getting sick is a part of our growing up and most children get through the experiences fine. Expecting us all to rush our children to a doctor every time they get sick, such as when they catch the rare sickness of meningitis which has symptoms of less serious sicknesses in the beginning, is not only ridiculous but would bankrupt most of us. I went to a doctor a few weeks ago to get two prescriptions rewritten (this was a new doctor who had taken the place of my previous one, so he wanted to review my case and talk to and examine me before rewriting the prescriptions). He charged my insurance company $245.00 for the visit. That doesn't include the cost of the medicine, just the visit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by RandomMan on 02:07 PM June 22nd, 2006 EST (#12)
|
|
|
|
|
First of all, I'm not sure where you're coming from Dittohd. You seem to be making a federal case out of something completely "out of the blue" here. There is no comparison between this man who failed to go "down with the ship" of his suicidal wife and a mother/nurse who has a clear duty to care for a sick child to the best of her ability, i.e. to exercise due diligence. Why are the courts imposing a duty on this man to stop a deranged woman from intentionally harming herself, simply because he's married to her? If he told her to "go ahead and do it" and then set up the situation intentionally to facilitate what she said she was about to do at that exact moment, clearly he is guilty, but I seriously doubt that is the case here. The fact that a woman might previously have articulated suicidal thoughts doesn't mean that the man should have to spend the rest of his existence hiding sharp objects and car keys, and face criminal prosecution IF she ever does it!
Where did the suicidal woman's personal responsibility begin? I thought you small-government conservatives really big on personal responsibility? It's not as if he pushed the car over the damned cliff, but the courts are treating him as if he killed her and injured the kids, instead of the fact that a mentally ill and obviously deranged and violent woman did it. The just have to blame a man in every case, and he was the only one involved.
As to your out-of-the-blue comment above, I never said anyone should end up in prison if a misdiagnosis is made, nor did I suggest that doctors should be free from responsiblity. Where the hell is that coming from? What does it have to do with this whole subject?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Raymond Cuttill on 12:27 PM June 21st, 2006 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
of adultery. That's the real charge. It looks good to the women in the county and helps with promotion or votes for the politicians who employ them. And even if the prosecution fails, perhaps because it simultaneously means he has to be a brilliant psychiatrist (knowing her exact mental state and exactly what she would do) and an evil co-conspirator (having intent, which is hard to prove anyway, to let her commit suicide, not only herself but with the children!), then the prosecution can say they tried to have him jailed (for adultery really).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Thundercloud on 01:05 PM June 21st, 2006 EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
Okay, then.
So to follow this "logic" then that means that the WIFE of every man who has committed suicide because his wife divorced him, left him in financial ruin and took his kids away, is JUST as responsible for their husband's death as this guy is supposedly responsible for the suicide of his wife.
...oh, wait. I forgot. We'd have to live in a just society for that to be the case...!
This case is RIDICULOUS.
Women, I ask you; WHEN are you doing to take responsibility for your own actions like adults? And when are you going to ACT like you're REALLY equal with men? Because a lot of you act like spoiled children, too young to be held accountable or responsible for your OWN actions.
And Men I ask YOU; When are you going to stop letting the system rob you of your GOD GIVEN, Constitutional, Civil and BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS and stand up and say; "ENOUGH ALREADY! It stops HERE!" Quit being chivalrous. Quit being "Nice", Quit being this whipped puppy who submits to his mistress And for GOD'S sake, quit being such wussie-poopies. Stand up for yourselves. Stop being afraid of women. They are wronging you. If you do NOT stand up to them, you are not men. You are just swishy, limp-wristed cowards.
Frankly I'm SICK to death of it...!
If it takes a God d@#ed civil war, then so BE IT!
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Roy on 12:13 AM June 22nd, 2006 EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
(T-Cloud) -- "Women, I ask you; WHEN are you doing to take responsibility for your own actions like adults? And when are you going to ACT like you're REALLY equal with men? Because a lot of you act like spoiled children, too young to be held accountable or responsible for your OWN actions?"
Maybe we should make a law that men cannot marry children-masquerading-as-women?
A woman wishing to be married would have to pass a thorough psychological exam to certify that she is (a) sane (b) non-Narcissistic (c) capable of sexual pleasure (d)able to attempt adult thought.
No woman would ever submit to this exam.
Because they all know they can't meet the most relaxed criteria of (a) --- actual sanity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Thundercloud on 01:22 PM June 22nd, 2006 EST (#11)
|
|
|
|
|
Roy-
I still remember a PHIL DONAHUE show, where the discussion was about men. Donahue comes out on stage and the first thing he says is; "What is up with men? Something is wrong with men, SOMETHING is wrong with men!"
Of course the largely female audience erupted into cheers.
At the time maybe he had a very SMALL point. But now I have to ask the obvious question; "What is wrong with women?" Maybe there was something wrong with men 27 years ago, when I saw that episode on Donahue, but those "problems" have largely been addressed and fixed.
But now there is something definitely wrong with women. Something VERY wrong.
Men owned up to their "problems". When are women going to be adult enough to take responsibility and confront theirs? They really need to. Because the onus is completely on them, now.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
Anonymous User writes "Victor Han, 34, of Staten Island