Punch on: Open thread 28/09/2011

Sir Bob says:

10:53am | 28/09/11

“I don’t like Mondays. The other six days aren’t looking too flash either. Is that a pixie I just saw?”

Pastor Sauce says:

07:20am | 28/09/11

Most of us laugh at your posts everyday acotrel.

NicoleG says:

08:05am | 28/09/11

Acotrel ! I reckon ! You’ve got ! Some sort of ! Man crush on Abbott ! You’re totally ! Obsessed with him ! Now ! I know you’re ! Nobody’s dill ! But perhaps ! We could find ! Someone ! To adopt you ! ! !

acotrel says:

08:34am | 28/09/11

@NicoleG
I really like going to the zoo, and watching the big silverback throw excrement at the kids who laugh at him.

I’d point out that I don’t usually try to generate any bullshit about the possibility of Abbott being deposed by his disconcerted followers. Like starting the campaign against Julia - that sort of thing is your go !

TimB says:

08:37am | 28/09/11

Oh god Nicole. My eyes!

I appreciate what you were trying to do, but Acotrel is bad enough on his own. This parody is just painful.

NicoleG says:

08:53am | 28/09/11

LOL you’re going to have to translate that for me acotrel, because I’m stuffed if I know what the hell you mean.

Sorry Tim, couldn’t help myself. On reflection, just looking at it, you’re right. Now I’ve got a migraine  

TomZ says:

11:12am | 28/09/11

@Pastor Sauce, “laugh” perhaps. However, “cringe” is right up there. Sometimes it is not easy watching another human being obsessively degrade himself just for attention.

Pastor Sauce says:

11:36am | 28/09/11

TomZ, its a pretty lonely world for ALP members/voters at the moment, not too many of them left, so I guess any attention he receives is better than no attention.  As the Labor party certainly aren’t listening to the members.

Coop says:

04:13pm | 28/09/11

Kevin Rudd is a dill

acotrel says:

07:19am | 28/09/11

@iansand
So people shouldn’t be proud to be Australian ?

‘Liberalise’ : - I’m aboard, pull up the ladder !

iansand says:

07:56am | 28/09/11

Absolutely, alcotrel.  Pride is not mouthing a platitude every morning, although it is a concept that appeals to a certain shallow type of self proclaimed patriot.

adam says:

08:18am | 28/09/11

it’s not a Pride pledge she is discussing its a Loyalty Pledge. A somewhat different beast. Schools should be free to educate not indoctrinate

acotrel says:

08:37am | 28/09/11

@Adam
So we should be loyal even if have no pride in Australia ?

marley says:

08:44am | 28/09/11

Oh gawd, Acotrel - would you please, please, please learn to punctuate?  It shouldn’t be beyond the capacity of someone with your claimed level of education and intellect.

iansand says:

08:45am | 28/09/11

I would have thought that a loyalty pledge was a pretty extreme example of indoctrination.

adam says:

08:46am | 28/09/11

No Acotrel we should not be “taught” pride nor loyalty. these emotions either formant or not, it’s not up to any gubernment to determine if or how deeply they are felt

acotrel says:

09:22am | 28/09/11

@Adam
Kids often learn pride in themselves, and other things at school ! I am loyal to Australia because I am proud to be Australian.  When that pride is destroyed by pollies, I feel like emigrating !

acotrel says:

09:26am | 28/09/11

@Adam
Can you recite the oath of allegiance?
I’ll give you a start :
I love God and my country…..... ?

The last line is:
And cheerfully obey my parents, teachers,and the laws !
Bit of a joke, these days ?

Bet you can’t fill in the rest ?

acotrel says:

09:30am | 28/09/11

@iansand
What’s wrong with indoctrination?  We won two world wars because of it ! And our whole corporate world lives on it.

adam says:

09:46am | 28/09/11

Acorel, No I can’t and don’t need to be able to. I developed my pride in enthusiasm for and duty to this conrty without mouthing empty platitudes. I served for ten years without the needing to regurgitate someone elses words
We won two world wars because of the efforts and sacrifices of thousands of brave Australians, not indoctrination. Fool

Ben C says:

09:51am | 28/09/11

@ acotrel

Of course you have no problems with indoctrination, your beloved ALP are mastering the art of it.

iansand says:

09:56am | 28/09/11

alcotrel - On the other hand, the losing side for one of those wars was led by a master of indoctrination.  When a population stops thinking you should start worrying.

adam says:

10:08am | 28/09/11

@adam

jeez my spelling is shot these days, meant country

acotrel says:

10:09am | 28/09/11

@iansand
I used to work with a guy who was in the Wehrmacht in WW2.  He told me the one lot they were afraid of being captured by were the Australians.  He said ‘They were so indoctrinated they’d shoot you.’
I told my ex-serviceman father whar he’d said.  My father said ’ I know who was bloody indoctrinated, and it wasn’t us ! ‘

The message is - we are all indoctrinated.  But you can take comfort in the fact that if you know it’s happening, it’s ineffective !

Would I tell you lies ?

iansand says:

10:34am | 28/09/11

Afrika Korp, alcotrel?  Otherwise you are talking through your arse.

Aitch B says:

10:46am | 28/09/11

@acotrel

Just a friendly reminder, mate…....

NO SPACES BEFORE QUESTION AND EXCLAMATION MARKS!!!

Please…...

fairsfair says:

08:32am | 28/09/11

Winner

TRBNGR says:

12:53pm | 28/09/11

I’m with fairs, I’ve opened this thread 3 times today and pissed myself over that comment each time.

Fine work Castro.

And I agree with the innuendo from other posters, they look blazed.

Wynston Cruso says:

02:21pm | 28/09/11

It just seems so…..right. I’m torn between laughter and a serious thought process.

Sev says:

04:49pm | 28/09/11

First Place

Michael says:

08:39am | 28/09/11

Morning Nossy

I can’t hold it any longer, How are you enjoying the leadership question hanging over Julia and the ALP? and how do you reconcile this against your previous position in regards to the leadership of the Liberals and the “inside oil” that Tony was Gaawwwn?

The funniest thing for me is knowing i will have to atone for allowing myself the guilty pleasure of poking fun at someone and still, i do it. It’s a fun little game this living thing

acotrel says:

08:44am | 28/09/11

‘Taxpayers dollars being burned bigtime by Rudd and even though hes the Foreign Minister and naturally some travel is warranted this guy is beyond the pale. ‘

But isn’t he doing as great job for Australia ?  Surely you have to admit that his actions in relation to Libya were excellent ? And we’re still talking to Indonesia and Malaysia, even though Tony Abbott is continuing with Pauline Hanson’s politics ? - Good stuff Kevvy, keep it up !

nihonin says:

08:52am | 28/09/11

What I found disturbing is how Kev always seems to know where the cameras are, to record these Kodak moments with celebrities, and I do use that word celebrities, loosely.

nossy says:

09:29am | 28/09/11

@Michael well young Michael when you have been around as long as me you realise there is only one certainty in life and thats death - even taxes are negotiable so I would caution you at this time as the “race” is still on - hold on to your Abbott betting ticket fella because it may be worth something-  then again maybe not. I have ditched both major parties Michael and have swung behind Bob Katters new party - hes my man! Beach time for me fella - back in 2 hours.
http://www.ausparty.org.au/

Michael says:

09:50am | 28/09/11

Thanks Nossy, hope you enjoy the beach:)

I have nothing today, it’s a nice nothing, bit quiet though, perhaps i will go and say nice things to strangers.

nossy says:

11:49am | 28/09/11

@Michael hang in there Michael - sometimes a quiet day is a good day fella.

adam says:

08:47am | 28/09/11

I vote for this one

nihonin says:

09:38am | 28/09/11

Agree totally with the above comment, well said FF.

Elphaba says:

10:24am | 28/09/11

“Erick still spams any topic with his self pity and misogyny”

@Richard:

Alcotrel is a far worse offender.  A topic about bunnies would be turned into a soliloquy about his hard-on for the Labor Party.

In short - scroll button.  Use it!

acotrel says:

10:34am | 28/09/11

Erick says horrible things which insinuate that women are mean to men !  Mine usually treats me right, but it’s a woman’s privilege to change her mind ?

fairsfair says:

11:00am | 28/09/11

@acotrel. I’m sorry - I don’t even understand what that means. You sometimes have very good things to say, but until you learn to put more than one thought into a single post (this repetitive posting and replying to yourself is a joke) and half the time I don’t know if you are asking a question of making a statement.

Erick says:

12:17pm | 28/09/11

Thank you, fairsfair.

All I’ve ever stood for is equality of opportunity and equality of treatment. It seems that some people feel very threatened by this idea, and so they lash out with any made-up accusations they can imagine.

NicoleG says:

12:42pm | 28/09/11

Can you direct this to Kika too fairs? I’m sick to death of her rants. She follows him around like a bloody stalker.

acotrel says:

10:46am | 28/09/11

Was that next door to the hotel where Mal Fraser lost his dacks ?

fairsfair says:

09:43am | 28/09/11

KR: Could you tell my why Bob?

pmsl Shane* - cracker!

Damocles says:

11:33am | 28/09/11

Good one Shane*!

Aidan says:

10:45am | 28/09/11

Oh my god, you’re right!

Man, what a legend that guy was. The Jimi Hendrix of bass playing!
And such a horrific way to go too…..

On the plus side I’ve just bought myself a new Marshall half-stack.
I’ll be belting out Metallica tunes full-blast all weekend in his honour!

Max, of Rocky says:

11:08am | 28/09/11

@  Aidan

I’m glad you are not my neighbor, 

Love music but in moderation (volumetric).

Elphaba says:

12:03pm | 28/09/11

Nice work, Aidan!

His bass solos stil give me chills.  I have a bootleg of his last concert in 1986 - the recording is dodgy (fan taped), but it’s still got amazing sound.  It’s phenomenal that those sounds can come out of a bass guitar.

Don’t listen to Max - you can be my neighbour any time.

Aidan says:

12:10pm | 28/09/11

@Max

Rockhampton? Cool, I’m in Newcastle.
You’ll be able to hear me from there!

adam says:

01:31pm | 28/09/11

Aiden point your amp toward the lake so’s I cna hear ya in Speersy

NicoleG says:

11:01am | 28/09/11

The man who smiles when things go wrong has thought of someone to blame it on.

NicoleG says:

11:23am | 28/09/11

Look, in all fairness, they are her parents. As parents, of course they’re going to support her 100%, it’s just natural. This is really a non issue.

Aitch B says:

12:06pm | 28/09/11

I agree with NicoleG. Whatever some may think about Julia Gillard I don’t think there’s any way that she would put her parents up to this.

nihonin says:

11:46am | 28/09/11

They’re Pinky and the Brain, Pinky and the Brain, one is a genius the other insane….......................take your pick.

Pinky says:

01:24pm | 28/09/11

@ nihonin - “Narf” “poink”

nihonin says:

02:23pm | 28/09/11

Pinky, the same thing we do every night….............plan to take over the world!

Max, of Rocky says:

12:58pm | 28/09/11

GREAT

so good, do they still show that cartoon on telly ?
Well done.

nihonin says:

02:28pm | 28/09/11

Max of Rocky, there is a new series, but it also has Elvira from the original Animaniacs series of cartoons.  It is nowhere near as entertaining as the original Pinky and The Brain series.

Knemon says:

12:06pm | 28/09/11

That’s not the only thing Bolt has lost…credibility comes to mind.

Adam Diver says:

12:10pm | 28/09/11

It is indeed interesting. Ironically Bolt was named far worse things in the court case, then anything that he wrote leading him to appear in court.

I think the court probably got it right, but I think the laws are completly insane.

Aidan says:

12:26pm | 28/09/11

In the words of Nelson Muntz:

“HAW HAW!!!”

Tim says:

12:48pm | 28/09/11

I dislike Andrew Bolt but this court case was a disgrace.
There is no way what Bolt wrote should be classified as racial villification but under the law as it stands it could be.

The law definitely needs to be changed.

AdamC says:

01:29pm | 28/09/11

It seems that Bolt might have been a little naive here. From the judge’s comments, it seems the hurdle that the plaintiffs had to jump over was so low that he was always on a hiding to nothing.

If Bolt hoped that somehow notions of free expression would trump political correctness in Victoria, it was always likely to be a vain hope.

Max, of Rocky says:

01:30pm | 28/09/11

Some would say that to change the law would be discrimination.

No matter what you do or say, “it’s discrimination” is the call and it’s put in the “too hard basket”.

Political correctness has a lot to answer for.

SimonFromLakemba says:

02:05pm | 28/09/11

Basically correct in what everyone is saying. I dont like him at all, think hes an opportunist who offers nothing to journalism.

But I think if its good for one side it should be good enough for the other too, could a white person sue for discrimination?

Bullwinkle says:

02:05pm | 28/09/11

Yes Max
We should be allowed to say whatever the F we want to people we don’t like, be they black, muslim or whatever.
What party do you support now that One Nation has bit the dust? Oh right, the Liberal party.
How you like living with the fringe?

Erick says:

04:13pm | 28/09/11

This ridiculous decision proves that the racist laws, and the tribunals that implement them, are totally useless. I hope the new government will move to abolish all of these hindrances to free speech, equality and democracy.

PTom says:

04:16pm | 28/09/11

What is interesting about this is the whinge about Bolts right to free speech while at the same time saying other don’t have the same right to be offended or to feel abused and to take action against.

I wonder how many people would be offend if papers start publishing names of cizitens that they consider no longer to be Australian.

Beside Bolt support have no right to whinge about rights of free speech, because Bolt has publicly argued that there should be no bill of rights.

AdamC says:

04:56pm | 28/09/11

PTom, would the rights instrument as proposed have actually protected Bolt’s freedom of expression in this case? I doubt it.

I am not sure what your first paragraph is on about, but the answer to the question in your second one is lots of people. The better question would be whether those who are offended should have a cause of action merely on the basis of being offended. Many of us would prefer that they did not.

marley says:

05:05pm | 28/09/11

@PTom - I think you’re missing the point of what this really means.  It’s not Bolt’s responsibility to uphold freedom of speech - it’s the court’s responsibility.  And I think they just failed, big time.

Bolt’s comments were offensive, no doubt;  however, they weren’t defamatory nor did the constitute what I understand to be hate speech.  And being offensive shouldn’t constitute an offence in law.  Otherwise, what is the value of freedom of speech?

Warren says:

06:13pm | 28/09/11

@Marley. Bolt’s work contained lies and went out of his way to misinform his readers. His appeal to “Freedom of speech” as pointed out by @PTom is baseless, as we do not have a bill of rights in Australia.

What is interesting the the way the right typically argue for the “rule of law” until it goes against their agenda, then they resort to the “end of democracy” argument.

marley says:

07:00pm | 28/09/11

@Warren - Bolt said nothing that was defamatory.  Otherwise, he would have been sued for that.  He didn’t utter any hate speech.  Otherwise, he could presumably have been charged under the criminal law for that.

He uttered opinions that were “out there,” and used dodgy data to back them.  That, my friend, is what free speech is - the right to state your opinions, however misinformed, however unbalanced, however wrong.  I’m no fan of Bolt’s, but this ruling is a threat to all of us.

Tim says:

07:58pm | 28/09/11

Exactly Marley,
If what Bolt wrote was so bad they could have sued him using defamation laws. But it wasn’t, so they couldn’t.
Instead he was sued under racial vilification laws because they were “offended”
What a joke.

PTom says:

09:39pm | 28/09/11

@marley, I have read more then what one article on this.
What Bolt said might have been done for defamation, but they choice not to as the wanted to make a point instead.

From their lawyer.
We see this as a really important case. We see it as clarifying the issue of identity—who gets to say who is and who is not Aboriginal. Essentially, the articles by Bolt have challenged people’s identity. He’s basically arguing that the people he identified are white people pretending they’re black so they can access public benefits … We’re not seeking to make this a case about freedom of speech, because it’s not. The issue is essentially about whether or not other people can define identity, and in particular Aboriginal identity, based on how you look. 

marley says:

07:12am | 29/09/11

@PTom - I don’t entirely agree with your interpretation of the issue, but even if I did - are we no longer allowed to raise the issue of whether someone has a legitimatte claim to aboriginality?  Are we no longer allowed to question whether programs meant to assist disadvantaged aborigines might be monopolized by people who are not especially disadvantaged?  Are these no longer questions for legitimate discussion?

Knemon says:

12:11pm | 28/09/11

Hi nossy, I reckon if a PM has their 50th birthday while in office then a public holiday should be afforded all. I will fire up the barbie and cook Welsh sausages in her honour!

adam says:

12:29pm | 28/09/11

Knemon, that’s an idea we can all get behind. Abbott should suggest just that and then watch as she tries to avoid making it so

nossy says:

12:33pm | 28/09/11

@Knemon now thats the spirit Knemon! If we can get everyone to celebrate in this fashion or similar Ms Gillard will have a ripper 50th fella! I wonder what Tones is going to get her?

Max, of Rocky says:

12:41pm | 28/09/11

She would probably prefer Welsh Rabbot. 

Ben C says:

12:50pm | 28/09/11

@ nossy

Quite an appropriate birthday present for Julia, the final episode of this polarising attempt at parodying her life. Do you think the ABC deliberately planned the programming to coincide with Julia’s birthday?

Looking forward to your review tomorrow.

nossy says:

02:27pm | 28/09/11

@Ben C   dont know if it was planned Ben - but I shall be kind in my review. I saw the quiz king Barry Jones talking on the ABC about it a few days ago and he basically said he hasnt raised a laugh in 3 episodes - but hey that might just be Bazza!

Kipling says:

01:19pm | 28/09/11

Oh thank you James, that is the second best read I have had today…

A job well done it would seem.

Am I the only one who sees the irony of Bolt coming out of court where he was found guilty of breaching the discrimination act and being given a very public platform to say that his freedom of speech, NO WAIT, freedom of speech period, had been attacked.

Is that not ironic that he had the FREEDOM to make that SPEECH?

I always thought it was a matter of when given Mr Bolt’s loose application of research and fact coupled with his demonstrably one sided ideology driven articles. Mr Bolt seems a great one to be all about his own freedom of speech but he does not appear to be very committed to opposing views having much air. That does not go to his credit.

Max Redlands says:

01:55pm | 28/09/11

ICB on the headline “found guilty”.

This was not a criminal matter but the ABC are trying to dress it up like it is.

A very poor effort.

Tim says:

02:04pm | 28/09/11

Kipling,
No.
What I find ironic is that the comments about Bolt from the plaintiffs all through the court case were far worse than anything he had written in his columns, yet he was the one being sued for causing offence.
Political Correctness at its worst.

PTom says:

04:36pm | 28/09/11

I wonder if Bolt will challenge to protect his Rights to Free Speech under the bill of rights. Oops Bolt opposed that.

Tim,
Tell us, would you be offend if a paper published your full name in the paper saying “you can not call youself Australian as you either to white or not white enough”

Shafeel Sahaaly says:

07:37pm | 28/09/11

What cowards Messers Bolt and Abbott are. Its breathtaking that when I first came to Oz, it was due to its fair go and refreshing lack of pretense. How distant this is in the public sphere today. Yes, I know I should be grtaeful that this is not Saudi or Iran and least we have rights etc etc etc, but if that is the level we judge by, then sorry mate no progress since 1981 when I arrived.Rather than mentioning the judges considered arguments in accordance with laws passed by the Parliament of which he is the opposition leader Abbott doles out the free speech mantra. Point out that the judge had a very Jewish sounding name why don’t you TA, and round of the crticism you hypocrite. When the dictator of Iran slandered the holocaust, why did we not respect his right to free speech fellow Aussie lovers of free speech. At least he has the miserable guts to be honest about his hatreds. Where were you Bolty to defend Carnita Mathhews right to religous expression as would be guaranteed in the US. Thats what we are fighting for I thought. So, AB and TA shall I retreat into slights about the Anglo-Celtic rewrite of Australian Aboriginal history and constantly criticise, as the Aussie govt does about China’s lack of free speech(Not!) or be honest and acknowledge that sometimes i have views and opinions that suck and are racist but thank God I live in a place where I can be taught to be better by people like the good Judge. So Bolty and Abbs either put up, and start a proper campaign for free speech against the assualt by the Jewish Aussie judge(I wonder what per cent he is or he claimed holocaust pension dubiously, oops quick defend me Andrew, free speech), or as the saying the wonderful Australian parlance,tell your sad stories walking mateys.

Tim says:

08:08pm | 28/09/11

PTom,
Did you even read the story?
You do not have the right to not be offended.
If what Bolt said was defamatory he could have been sued for that. But it wasn’t and these plaintiffs decided to pull the race card because they didn’t like his opinion.

Max, of Rocky says:

02:46pm | 28/09/11

@  Terra Nova

Battle was: Saturday 14th of October 1066

http://www.battle-of-hastings-1066.org.uk/timeline-battle-hastings.htm

Your facts, like your comments, need some homework.

USA, UK ,USSR, UGL,UNSW,UNE ,UOW,USYD says:

03:15pm | 28/09/11

why do homework? The answers are in the back of the book ( Peter Frilingos)

RyaN says:

03:23pm | 28/09/11

@Max, of Rocky: It might be indicative of the average level of education of the very small minority that still support Labor.

Min, of Rocky ( Rocky and Bullwinkle) says:

03:25pm | 28/09/11

Where did you study The Battle Of Hastings?
UOW,USYD, UNSW,UTS,USA,UNE,UGL,UAE,USSR,UWS,UDL,ANU ,or UQLD?Or UP U?
Or the Urinal?
Did you climb Mount Fanklin to get some fresh water?

over the unfunny random says:

04:28pm | 28/09/11

wow we’ve sunk to some new lows here today

Max, of Rocky says:

05:58pm | 28/09/11

@  Min, of Rocky ( Rocky and Bullwinkle)

Don’t look now your ignorance is showing,

when I went to high school is was a standard history lesson.

You do not need a degree in history to know about it.
I did go to Uni, business admin, Griffith Uni, Mt Gravatt campus.

So, why the agro ?  Had a bad day ?  Hope it gets better,
go home take a bex and a good cup of tea, have a good lie down. 

Min of Rocky and Bullwinkle says:

04:00pm | 28/09/11

Julia Bishop deserves my condolescences !
Who stabbed her in the back? Bronwyn? 
Or was it Julian Morrow who gave evidence for the ABC in senate hearings?

Max, of Rocky says:

05:29pm | 28/09/11

Big Julie is the Gillard variety,

my apologies to the Bard.

AdamC says:

04:09pm | 28/09/11

I am disappointed, but not surprised. I have read the decision summary and, based on that, aspects of the judgement look quite overtly political. However, the underlying problem is that the law appears to confer on people a right not to be ‘reasonably offended’ by any comments made about their ethnicity. That essentially rules out robust debate on many issues around multiculturalism.

Australia is a bit behind the curve on this issue. While other countries are openly questioning the benenfits of multiculturalism, it remains just about Australia’s most sacred cow.

marley says:

05:10pm | 28/09/11

@AdamC - do you know, I haven’t been in favour of a bill of rights up to this point, but either we need one, or a constitutional amendment to establish freedom of speech/expression as a fundamental right.  This decision has seriously circumscribed that right.  And I don’t know why people can’t see that.

adam says:

03:02pm | 28/09/11

The police in the latest casehave released this statement

When moving your vehicle put your children in your car or have them looked after by an adult
When reversing be sure you have a clear line of sight behind your vehicle
Always drive slowly when children are around as they are unable to judge the speed and distance of traffic and their behaviour can be erratic and unpredictable
Never assume someone else is looking after your child – make sure you know where they are at all times

It saddens me that they would have to make any such statement but they apparently need to remind us of our obligations.

I feel it would be entirely heartless for any censur of the parent in these cases. They are going to punish themselves more than enough

Elphaba says:

03:03pm | 28/09/11

@JD, I don’t think it’s that simple.  Children are small, they move lightning fast, and those cars are high up with poor visability when it counts the most.

I think the parents are going through all the guilt and horror that they need to without slapping a negligent homocide charge on them.

JD says:

03:12pm | 28/09/11

sorry that was meant to say killed with the parent’s car by one of them, not in a murderous rage

Jade says:

03:46pm | 28/09/11

I think we should kill all parents… if it was a dog there would be calls to eradicate the entire breed…

JD says:

04:30pm | 28/09/11

so if I reverse my car out of my driveway and run over someone elses child and I feel really bad about it, I shouldn’t be charged?

Elphaba says:

04:50pm | 28/09/11

@JD, you want the parents charged with negligent homocide, then you use an example of you running over someone else’s child.

You might want to pick one example at a time.  Otherwise, if the stranger was in the exact same situation - a momentary loss of control of the car, the child ran behind and wasn’t seen - no, I don’t think they should be charged.  Charging someone should be reserved for people with intent.  These people certainly had no intent to run over and kill their children.  There are risks we have to accept that come with these conveniences like cars that we bring into our lives.

Sometimes, bad things happen.  That doesn’t rationalise it, but neither does charging a parent who will live with that horror for the rest of their lives.

JD says:

05:31pm | 28/09/11

I think they’re pretty similar examples, just trying to determine if it’s ok to kill you’re own kids with a car but not someone else’s.

so if homicide is too strong, how about negligent driving occasioning death?

here’s another example, I am driving home not paying attention really as the song on the radio is my absolute favourite and I don’t see a car turning, I hit it and kill someone inside, should I be charged or let go as I feel really bad and didn’t intend to kill anyone?