Theme: Coercion

  • It’s because I am very smart about what I do, in that I never cross the line bet

    It’s because I am very smart about what I do, in that I never cross the line between talking about it, to encouraging others to act, conspiring to act, or acting on it. It’s not hard for STUPID PEOPLE to make assumptions. Smart people laugh at you for your ignorance.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-03-04 00:15:41 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1102361937827020801

    Reply addressees: @camelback_t

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1102361051088277509


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1102361051088277509

  • scold [skōld] NOUN a person, in particular a woman, who nags or grumbles constan

    scold

    [skōld]

    NOUN

    a person, in particular a woman, who nags or grumbles constantly.

    “his mother was the village scold”

    COMMON SCOLD

    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    In the common law of crime in England and Wales, a common scold was a type of public nuisance—a troublesome and angry person who broke the public peace by habitually chastising, arguing and quarrelling with their neighbours. The majority of individuals punished for scolding were women, though men could also be labelled scolds.

    The offence, which was exported to North America with the colonists, was punished by monetary fines, but also by methods intended to publicly humiliate such as ducking: being placed in a chair and submerged in a river or pond. Although rarely prosecuted it remained on the statute books in England and Wales until 1967.

    Scolding offences were commonly presented and punished in manorial and borough courts that governed the behaviour of peasants and townspeople across England. Scolds were also presented in church courts.[2] The most common punishment was a monetary fine.

    Various historians have argued that scolding and bad speech were coded as feminine offences by the late medieval period. Women of all marital statuses were prosecuted for scolding, though married women featured most frequently, while widows were rarely labelled scolds.[3] In some places, such as Exeter, scolds were typically poorer women, whereas elsewhere scolds could include members of the local elite.[4] Women who were also charged with other offences, such as violence, nightwandering, eavesdropping or sexual impropriety were also likely to be labelled scolds.[5] Individuals were frequently labelled ‘common scolds’, indicating the impact of their behaviour and speech on the whole community. Karen Jones identified 13 men prosecuted for scolding in Kent’s secular courts, compared to 94 women and 2 couples.[6] Men accused of scolding were often charged alongside their wives. Helen, wife of Peter Bradwall scolded Hugh Welesson and Isabel, his wife, in Middlewich in 1434, calling Isabel a “child murderer” and Hugh a “skallet [wretched] knave”. Isabel and Hugh also scolded Helen, calling her a “lesyng blebberer” (lying bletherer). All parties were fined for the offences, though Hugh and Isabel were fined jointly.[7] Like women, male scolds were often accused of many other offences, such as fornication, theft, illegal trading, and assault.[8]

    Note that in american law, Scolding was folded into disorderly conduct in the early 1970’s


    Source date (UTC): 2019-03-03 18:29:00 UTC

  • LIEBEL, GRAPHIC NOVELIST, LUNATIC, GETS 41M CIVIL PENALTY IN ADDITION TO LIFE WI

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blake_LeibelBLAKE LIEBEL, GRAPHIC NOVELIST, LUNATIC, GETS 41M CIVIL PENALTY IN ADDITION TO LIFE WITHOUT PAROLE

    A Los Angeles judge has ordered Blake Leibel, a graphic novelist from a wealthy Canadian Jewish family to pay $41.6 million to the family of his slain fiancee, whom he brutally tortured and killed in 2016 just weeks after their daughter was born.

    ( Note: Olga was Ukrainian citizen of Persian (?) Descent) )

    Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Bobbi Tillmon delivered the verdict after a bench trial in the wrongful-death lawsuit filed by Iana Kasian’s family against Blake Leibel, who carried out the gruesome slaying using a book he worked on years earlier as a blueprint.

    “This murder didn’t just kill one person, it really did kill the family, it shattered the family. And the family has had a hard time crawling back from this,” said Jake Finkel, an attorney representing Kasian’s family.

    Leibel, who is imprisoned in Tehachapi California, did not attend the trial, Finkel added, nor did an attorney or family member on his behalf.

    Leibel, a scion of a powerful Canadian family who once had a fledgling Hollywood career, was convicted last year of first-degree murder, aggravated mayhem and torture, and is now serving a sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole.

    Before sheriff’s deputies arrested Leibel at the West Hollywood apartment he shared with Kasian, he had blocked doorways with mattresses and locked himself in a bedroom with Kasian’s mangled body.

    Prosecutors told jurors during Leibel’s trial that he had used a sharp object — perhaps the green paring knife or bloodied razor found in the couple’s bathroom — as well as his bare hands to cut and rip pieces of Kasian’s scalp. Most of the blood had been drained from her body. She died of severe blood loss.

    Kasian was alive during much of the torture and died “a very slow, excruciating, painful death,” Deputy Dist. Atty. Beth Silverman said, adding that the killing was patterned after “Syndrome,” a graphic novel that Leibel helped create years earlier. Its cover shows a baby doll with a partially removed scalp.

    Leibel moved to California in 2004, after which he married, had a son and lived primarily off an allowance from his parents — installments that totaled $1.8 million over about seven years, according to legal documents filed after his mother’s death in 2011.

    He also worked on the animated series “Spaceballs,” based on the 1987 film by Mel Brooks, and collaborated with a team of writers and an illustrator to develop “Syndrome.”

    In July 2015, court records show, he filed for divorce from his wife and soon after, Kasian was pregnant. She called her mother, Olga, saying her longtime dream of becoming a parent was finally coming true, according to a declaration filed in the family’s lawsuit.

    Prosecutors argued at the trial that Leibel was jealous of the attention Kasian gave to their newborn, Diana, when he killed her.

    Kasian grew up in Ukraine, where she worked for several years as an attorney prosecuting tax crimes. She immigrated to the U.S. in 2014.

    Finkel said the payout would help Olga Kasian raise her granddaughter, who turns 3 in May, the way Iana Kasian would have wanted. The pair live in Ukraine.

    “The most precious thing to take away from a little girl, from a woman, is her mother. [Diana’s] mother was taken away from her before she even got a real chance to learn about her, get to know her,” Finkel said. “At one point, she’s going to learn about the reality of her mother, and what happened to her, and her biological father and what he did to her mother.”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blake_Leibel


    Source date (UTC): 2019-03-02 17:08:00 UTC

  • u·su·ry [ˈyo͞oZH(ə)rē] NOUN the illegal action or practice of lending money at u

    u·su·ry

    [ˈyo͞oZH(ə)rē]

    NOUN

    the illegal action or practice of lending money at unreasonably high rates of interest.

    Why would there be laws against excessive interest rates?

    1. I loan you money. you pay me many times the original amount. and you can’t catch up, ever…..

    2. I loan you money, you cant pay, I take your house….

    3. I loan you money, you can’t pay, you have to resort to crime, others are harmed….

    In each of these circumstances the public is now carrying you as a burden, while the usurer is free riding on the public because he succeeded in baited you into moral hazard. As such it breaks the prohibition on negative externality.

    It breaks productivity by benefitting disproportionately from the suffering of others.

    It breaks asymmetry of information by asymmetry of incentive (taking advantage of the moment).

    The actor has no material skin in the game and no warranty. So we say instead the usurer has a negative due diligence.

    It’s “baiting into moral hazard.”

    TEST OF RECIPROCITY (Morality):

    Productive, (fail)

    Fully Informed (baited into optimism)

    Warrantied, (fail)

    Voluntary Transfer (“under duress”)

    Free of Negative Externality (fail)


    Source date (UTC): 2019-03-01 09:44:00 UTC

  • ( Why do we care if an old man pays a hooker for sex? I mean we’re always paying

    ( Why do we care if an old man pays a hooker for sex? I mean we’re always paying for it anyway? If it’s out of the commons, and it’s voluntary fine. If it’s involuntary because of traffickers, the that’s f-king evil and has to be dealt with ‘harshly’. if it’s involving those lacking maturity, then it has to be dealt with ‘brutally’. The ‘punish the Kraft’s of the world for paying hookers is just nonsensical. )


    Source date (UTC): 2019-02-26 07:11:00 UTC

  • THE LAW ON RECIPROCITY, RESTITUTION, PUNISHMENT, AND PREVENTION Restitution (1x)

    THE LAW ON RECIPROCITY, RESTITUTION, PUNISHMENT, AND PREVENTION

    Restitution (1x) for Accident

    Double (2x) Damages for failure to admit

    Triple (3x) Damages against individuals for harm

    Decuple (10x) Damages against groups for harm.

    The law has three purposes for three parties to any suit.

    1. Restitution (victim)

    2. Punishment (criminal)

    3. Prevention (polity)

    Groups must be HEAVILY incentivized to limit their own behavior since sacrificial actors exist in every group, and can advance group interests if not controlled by the group.

    Hence

    1. Punishment of the individual.

    2. Punishment of the individual’s family (insurers of individuals)

    3. Punishment of the group (insurers of families)


    Source date (UTC): 2019-02-25 10:02:00 UTC

  • THE RETURNS ON INTOLERANCE End Christian Tolerance as cheap Virtue Signaling. Re

    THE RETURNS ON INTOLERANCE

    End Christian Tolerance as cheap Virtue Signaling. Restore The VIrtue of Intolerance – and the high cost of intolerance. The returns on tolerance are suicidal. The returns on intolerance eternal.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-02-24 15:07:17 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1099687211270897665

  • there is no system of government better than rule of law. There is no gurrantee

    there is no system of government better than rule of law. There is no gurrantee of rule of law other than a militia of always armed and trained men, insuring it. PERIOD.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-02-24 14:59:44 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1099685313159593984

    Reply addressees: @rohansharan @mmay3r

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1099675463474180097


    IN REPLY TO:

    @rohansharan

    @mmay3r @curtdoolittle Propertarianism offers justice when sense of imposition of costs is presented.

    Toxicity from the left can abuse the system of law.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1099675463474180097

  • (Today in absurd video. Russian cops making some woman do nipple prints in addit

    (Today in absurd video. Russian cops making some woman do nipple prints in addition to finger prints. Seriously. You just can’t make this stuff up.)


    Source date (UTC): 2019-02-23 20:27:41 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1099405455044927489

  • THE FUTURE OF “MARRIAGE” Pairing off was driven by reduction of violence. Length

    THE FUTURE OF “MARRIAGE”

    Pairing off was driven by reduction of violence. Length of Pairing off was driven by neoteny. Marriage was driven by economic necessity (property). Universal marriage by farming. And the future is open for interpretation.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-02-23 20:13:00 UTC