Every now and again I wonder whether mankind is a stinky cesspool of rottenness that can only be cleansed away with a rather powerful comet. An article like this one gets me to really root for the comet.
In a nutshell, three drunk idiots--two girls and a guy, how cute--are walking the streets and shout out anti-gay slurs to a male passerby. The man grabs and slaps one of the women, and her dashing male defender of her honor punches the man in the face, knocking him to the ground unconscious where the two lovely women proceeded to stomp him to death. These three tributes to the glory of mankind are now facing murder charges. It's in Britain, so you know they're going to wuss out and let these people off with short sentences.
Now, if I'm walking down the street and one of my female friends starts making loud bigoted slurs at a random passerby? Not only would I let that passerby slap her, I'd probably give out slapping tips like "try to cuff the ears a bit" and "a bit more on the nose there". Okay, maybe not--after all, assaulting someone for mere words--as offensive as the words may be--crosses the line, and one can argue that the man who threw the punch was acting in defense of his friend. But then the kicking and stomping of an unconscious man? There's a special part of hell for you, missy! I hope you like wiping up after Hitler.
Envelopes – Essential Buyers Manuals
6 years ago
Yanno, my question is this: What the hell were all the onlookers doing? Beating someone to death in Trafalgar Square is like doing it in Times Square. It's not like it was some quiet, darkened alley in the East End. Not only are those three morons guilty of murder, everyone who looked on and did nothing is complicit.
ReplyDeleteFoggy--there might be a simple answer to that. They've used phsychological experiments that show that people are less likely to do the "right thing" (call for police, intervene to save a life, etc.) when there's a crowd, compared to when you're the sole onlooker, because in a crowd each person assumes someone else will act, or that if no one acts then that one person isn't as guilty of not acting (they'd only feel a "share" of the complicity). It helps explain why crowds can stand around without getting involved, while a lone passerby is more likely to help.
ReplyDeleteThat, and people suck.