Another great example of how lies propagate on Reddit

submitted by TruthTeller from i.imgur.com

top 100 commentsshow all 116
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]TruthTeller[S] 55 insightful - 11 fun55 insightful - 10 fun56 insightful - 11 fun -  (79 children)

This meme is going around everywhere and is full of lies. Mods banned a lawyer for telling the truth on reddit.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 23 insightful - 2 fun23 insightful - 1 fun24 insightful - 2 fun -  (77 children)

I agree that the meme completely misrepresents the reality of the marijuana charge. It's bogus.

Either way, I didn't see his rebuttal justifying the 6 months for the 3 sexual assault felonies.

Surely, the "lawyer" has some legal wisdom to enlighten us with that outcome.

[–]AmbroseBierce 22 insightful - 4 fun22 insightful - 3 fun23 insightful - 4 fun -  (8 children)

The lawyer addressed this.

If Turner violated his probation like the pot guy, he would face more time than him.

He also mentions how Turner has to register as a sex offender for the rest of his life, which will have a profound impact on his future.

[–]Humpty 12 insightful - 2 fun12 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

If Turner violated his probation like the pot guy, he would face more time than him.

No he wouldn't. Turner was sentenced to three years probation (among other things); Worsley pleaded to five years probation. If you violate probation, you can't go to jail for more time than your probation was for.

That's one of the several things that stand out in the self-described lawyer's reply that pretty clearly implies they're not actually a lawyer.

[–]AmbroseBierce 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Again you insist on comparing apples to oranges.

I'm not surprised.

[–]AmbroseBierce 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

If Turner violated his probation, he would be facing more time in prison.

You are being intentionally moronic by comparing probation periods vs penalties for violating probation.

I have to assume that you are a shill, a child, or an idiot

load more comments (1 reply)

    [–]RuckFeddit 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

    I would take the 5 years.

    [–]zephyranthes 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

    How about I steal all your property (and/or your parents' property), walk free and get to keep it but "register as a thief" for life? It will indeed have a """profound effect on my future""", that effect being neither me nor my children will ever need to work (assuming you're American and not a third-world shithole dweller).

    [–]No_ 20 insightful - 6 fun20 insightful - 5 fun21 insightful - 6 fun -  (6 children)

    Oh 6 months is the max we couldn’t possibly ruin Johnny’s career can we! Women don’t actually matter anyways. Johnny had a scholarship and all! His bosses liked him!

    /s

    [–][deleted]  (5 children)

    [deleted]

      [–]jet199 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

      Only because of the publicity.

      If he'd have gotten a sensible sentence no one could have complained and it would have worked it better for him long term.

      [–][deleted]  (3 children)

      [deleted]

        [–]just_lesbian_things 6 insightful - 3 fun6 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

        If only there was an easy way to not end up on the sex offender registry.

        [–][deleted] 16 insightful - 3 fun16 insightful - 2 fun17 insightful - 3 fun -  (60 children)

        3 bullshit charges. He fingered a drunk girl in an alley. He himself being also totally plastered, and her being totally up for it until the moment she passed out half way through the act. If she didn't consent, neither did he.

        [–][deleted] 28 insightful - 1 fun28 insightful - 0 fun29 insightful - 1 fun -  (56 children)

        He fingered a drunk girl in an alley

        On the ground, dry humping her passed out body behind a dumpster while she was above a .22 BAC. We've gotten to a point where that behavior is normalized I guess but it's fucked imo.

        The human race is slowly devolving back into fucking chimps.

        [–]Canbot 11 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 2 fun -  (24 children)

        The same people who cry "rape culture" in regards to drunken sex would also be the first to protest prohibition, or crackdowns on under aged drinking or raising the drinking age. They would be the first to insult and mock and denounce any parents who prohibit their kids from drinking. These are the contradictory, ignorant politics of children. If you are old enough to drink you are old enough to be responsible for the consequences.

        [–][deleted] 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (19 children)

        Who the fuck cares? Why is the foundation of your ethics dependent on what the wastes of oxygen do? Here's the truth: binge drinking on college campuses has always been degenerate and the byproduct of the trash of society trying to coerce women into sex because they can't just make money, be attractive, be successful, and be a good person. All claims to the contrary are from barista millenials or braindead boomers trying to justify their trashy youth.

        I'm a fan of social drinking, and I'm NOT telling anyone not to drink in social gatherings with friends, but you and I both know that .22 BAC is NOT social drinking nor is it a good idea no matter the circumstance. So many dumbfucks confuse the "American Pie/Animal House" experience with a social life when it doesn't even involve fucking socializing.

        [–]Canbot 10 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 2 fun -  (18 children)

        How is it that you imagine my ethics are based on the actions of others?

        It doesn't matter why people drink. When they drink they choose to accept the consequences. That includes having sex with people you would otherwise not agree to have sex with. No one is a victim in that. No one is getting raped. Stop attacking men for the poor decisions of women.

        [–]Humpty 15 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 0 fun16 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

        So if someone drinks so much they pass out and then someone else comes along and has sex with them then a) that's not rape, and b) whatever it is is the fault of the passed out person?

        That's absolute lunacy.

        [–]Canbot 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

        That is not what rape culture claims are based on. That has nothing to do with my argument.

        [–][deleted] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

        Whether you call it rape culture or not, you are quite literally claiming what user/Humpty is calling you out on.

        [–][deleted] 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

        Stop attacking men for the poor decisions of women.

        Stop attacking women for being raped.

        [–]Canbot 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

        That is retarded. No one is doing that.

        [–][deleted] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

        No one except you. You must be retarded then.

        [–]bald-janitor 3 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

        Never!

        [–]againstwomensright2 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

        No

        [–][deleted] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

        Because your response to me was to point out that those who defend binge drinking on college campuses decry rape culture- and you're rightly pointing out that their beliefs are contradictory. What I'm telling you is that those people's opinions don't matter and they can go fuck themselves.

        All men want to fuck like rabbits. So how about instead of getting a woman drunk and luring her back to your dorm, you hit the weight room, make good money, and earn the respect and admiration of your peers and then let the women be attracted to you. Call me crazy, but that seems like a healthier society.

        [–]just_lesbian_things 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

        oesn't matter why people drink. When they drink they choose to accept the consequences

        Yeah, consequences like going to jail if you commit a crime. Being drunk isn't a defense.

        [–]Canbot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

        Absolutely. Literally no one is arguing the opposite.

        [–][deleted] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

        would also be the first to protest prohibition, or crackdowns on under aged drinking or raising the drinking age

        No, I'd support it. This isn't even a valid argument. lol

        [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

        That's because you have integrity and consistent beliefs. I understand what he is saying; that people who defend debauchery get up in arms about rape culture. He's not wrong, but that proves absolutely nothing. It just means that those people defending the frat house binge drinking and questionable hookups are idiots.

        [–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

        Yes, it has nothing to do with the point being made.

        [–][deleted] 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (28 children)

        On the ground, dry humping her passed out body behind a dumpster while she was above a .22 BAC.

        He was just as drunk. If she wasn't responsible for her actions, neither was he.

        [–][deleted] 15 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 0 fun16 insightful - 1 fun -  (21 children)

        She wasn't acting upon anything. She was passive. My dude, if you're drunk, get behind the wheel, and kill someone accidentally, you are very much so responsible for your actions.

        Also, you are a rape apologist.

        [–]King_Brutus 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (18 children)

        The difference with the drunk driving is that it's a clear perpetrator and victim. Rape cases where both parties are drunk get far more blurrier due to lack of evidence most of the time (in no small part due to lack of administering rape kits following allegations) and rely on testimony. This is why people are so skeptical of rape charges most of the time, nobody is actually like "yeah go rape", it's that the lines aren't as clearly defined due to facts not being as 100% concrete.

        [–][deleted] 10 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 2 fun -  (16 children)

        No. The man was on top of the woman acting upon her. It's pretty clear to me mate.

        This is why people are so skeptical of rape charges most of the time

        It's usually men who are skeptical, not a vague "people".

        [–]King_Brutus 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (15 children)

        I'm not even specifically talking about this case, he was found guilty based on the evidence. But that doesn't make the guy you responded to incorrect. They were both drunk and people are responsible for their actions no matter if they are drunk or sober, it's not "rape apology" so take your righteous anger elsewhere.

        [–][deleted] 8 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 2 fun -  (10 children)

        It very much makes him incorrect. If a man and woman are drunk, and the man is acting upon a woman who is passively lying there, the man is a rapist and is responsible for his actions. The woman is not. The vast majority of the time, this is how it actually happens. It's not the woman acting upon the man (although that can happen).

        Who is angry though? Calm your penis down, Kyle. You rape apologist.

        [–][deleted] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

        Think about what you are saying.

        What is the alternative system? If you're drunk, anything goes? By killing a fifth of fireball, a woman basically implicitly agrees to wave all protection from sexual aggression/violence? That's insane.

        [–]just_lesbian_things 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

        The difference with the drunk driving is that it's a clear perpetrator and victim

        If she was drunkenly fingering and humping his ass, I would also support her being put on the sex offender registry and getting more than 6 months in prison.

        [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

        Never mind the fact that fingerbanging a girl is not rape in my book (and no law book in the world until incredibly recently), you can be passive and drunk and still be responsible for your actions. For instance, passing out drunk in the middle of the road and causing an accident. You can also be incredibly active and drunk and deemed not in control of your actions.

        [–][deleted] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

        Never mind the fact that fingerbanging a girl is not rape in my book

        Your book is not objective reality.

        no law book in the world until incredibly recently

        You say this as if it makes it any less valid.

        you can be passive and drunk and still be responsible for your actions

        Literally not in this case.

        passing out drunk in the middle of the road and causing an accident

        How do you cause an accident? You mean someone running over you? That would be their fault, unless it's one of those extremely rare cases where you happen to suddenly just drop in the middle of the street RIGHT in front of a car. Then it's just bad fucking luck on both sides.

        lol

        [–][deleted] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

        What.....?

        What actions? She didn't do anything illegal. He did. There is zero evidence she even gave a slurred shitfaced consent; she had a .22 BAC and was completely incoherent as evident by voicemails she left at 1:00 AM.

        When people question the actions of women who blackout at large parties, it isn't questioning the legality. It's "do they have accompanying friends?" or "is the crowd there safe?" or anything else like that. It's questioning their situational awareness.

        [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

        She didn't do anything illegal. He did.

        Was it unjust though?

        [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

        I'm not following. Was it unjust that she was blackout drunk with him? Again, for the record there is no evidence that their advances were recipricol; all evidence seems to indicate that she was incoherent.

        Even if she wasn't incoherent, she was beyond hammered. There was a time where "being a man" meant not preying on the vulnerable but I guess that's antiquated now.

        [–]zephyranthes 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

        He hid behind a dumpster to rape her and ran when the Swedes found him.

        [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

        Even consenting couples don't exactly fuck in the middle of the street mate.

        [–]NaughtyUnicorn 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

        The human race is slowly devolving back into fucking chimps.

        Honestly, I don't think we ever evolved very far from them in the first place.

        load more comments (1 reply)

          [–]Tom_Bombadil 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

          3 bullshit charges.

          Source?

          [–][deleted] 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

          The court case? Christ it wasn't that long ago was it?

          [–]Humpty 13 insightful - 2 fun13 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

          He chose to go to trial and a jury convicted him on three counts of felony sexual assault. He appealed the case to another court, which reviewed the conviction and upheld it.

          There were not "bullshit charges".

          [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

          I would ban anyone who doesn’t agree with the sub’s narrative. It’s just how reddit works.

          [–]RasputinsDong 27 insightful - 1 fun27 insightful - 0 fun28 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

          I saw this somewhere else and just knew it had to be bullshit. NOBODY gets 5 years for possession of weed, even if you have a lot on you in a less than friendly state. I figured there had to be something else to the story they're not telling you, and OF COURSE there is. One of the big reasons I got off facebook forever ago is bullshit like this.

          [–]insta 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          I figured there had to be something else to the story they're not telling you, and OF COURSE there is.

          The whole hullabaloo around weed charges is so disingenuous too. So many people in jail for possession of marijuana are simply dealers who plead down. You can be against the war on drugs and also realize that the dude in jail for marijuana is really in jail because he was distributing heroin.

          [–]Humpty 18 insightful - 3 fun18 insightful - 2 fun19 insightful - 3 fun -  (6 children)

          Another great example of how lies propagate on Saidit:

          • Self-described lawyer doesn't mention the part where first-time possession of marijuana for personal use is a misdemeanor in Alabama, but the cop decided - based on nothing - that the marijuana in the car was for more than just personal use, which is a felony, and the prosecutors have continued with that line of thinking ever since.
          • Self-described lawyer doesn't mention the part where Worsley is mentally disabled and not able to make decisions for himself without a guardian present, which he did not have when, faced with jail time or a plea deal, he signed the plea deal.
          • Self-described lawyer doesn't mention the part where Worsley, having returned to his home state, later became homeless and had no money to pay either the court costs in Alabama or the renewal fee for the card he needed to legally possess the medicine he needs.
          • Self-described lawyer, having thus left all of this out, paints a pretty picture of a man who only has himself to blame for now facing a five year prison sentence that, however you want to slice and dice it, is still ultimately the consequence of a simple marijuana possession arrest.

          Because this is what happens all across this nation, every single day, more often to black men than anyone else: an arrest for something minor leads to an impossible choice to either rot in prison until your court date - which you simply can't afford to do - or accept a lesser charge so you can get on with your life, and ends up ballooning into a felony prison sentence over bullshit like simply not having enough money to pay up when the court says you must pay up. Added bonus in this case: not having enough money to renew the card you're required to have in order to legally possess your medicine - a requirement that doesn't exist for any other medicine.

          It's absolute bullshit and OP's post is frankly no better than the original one. The only difference is the original one is missing out information so that it can vilify the white dude and self-described lawyer's response is missing out information so that he can vilify the black dude.

          [–]TruthTeller[S] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          "Mental illness" has become the catchall phrase for all deviants and criminals to hide behind. If you shoot up a school, you are "mentally ill." If you do drugs you are "mentally ill." If you are jobless and smoke pot all day, you are "mentally ill." If you are living in the streets, you are "mentally ill." Of course it is a perfect cover too: All mental health professionals are forbidden by law to say to press or anyone that they are treating such and such person. So you can do whatever you like, then when you face consequences, just use the magic words: "Mentally ill." Off you go.

          [–]Dragonerne 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          OP's post is no better than the original one? Lol, the original one is straight up propaganda lies and they even banned the lawyer.

          Defending the reddit fake news propaganda echo chamber is really weird. If you find yourself agreeing with something that's massively upvoted on reddit, its time to reconsider that belief. More often than not, its complete fake.

          [–]whereswhat 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

          I almost typed out a comment with nearly an identical stance/supporting logic. Good thing I scrolled down to the bottom before I wrote it out.

          [–]jet199 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

          Is this really a thing in the US?

          You can be stoned and so mentally disabled you can't make decisions for yourself but still driving on the roads and no one thinks that's a an issue in itself?

          [–]72ndGender 15 insightful - 2 fun15 insightful - 1 fun16 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

          Black man sentenced to 45 days for forcible rape if 14 year old girl. Why wasn't this viral when it happened?

          [–][deleted] 14 insightful - 3 fun14 insightful - 2 fun15 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

          User banned too. Can't have anyone disputing the narrative.

          [–]sudd3nclar1ty 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

          Yeah I was reading through it thinking that it's reasonable and logical so what's the problem then I saw the edit. LOL. Reddit got real weird real quick. I'm going back to digg.

          [–][deleted] 13 insightful - 2 fun13 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 2 fun -  (10 children)

          I do think he never shold have gotten arrested for weed, so then never would have gotten probation for it and never would have violated that probation. I wouldn't ban that lawyer tho I would calmly discuss it with him and disagree.

          [–]TruthTeller[S] 22 insightful - 3 fun22 insightful - 2 fun23 insightful - 3 fun -  (9 children)

          I do think that I should be 6 ft 7 with a 10 " dick and living in a huge mansion filled with money and naked babes. But that is not what the real world is about, is it?

          When you say you would "disagree" with the lawyer, what exactly would you "disagree" with him for? For telling the truth? He wasn't the prosecutor. He wasn't the defense lawyer. He just looked up the facts on this bullshit of a lie that is going around.

          No one is discussing the laws regarding weed, which seems to be your only concern. We are talking about the way reddit will lie and fabricate shit to make their points.

          Go to the legislature and have them change the laws so people can sit around and get high all day without any consequence.

          [–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

          see a bad law, break it

          I understand in reality he got 5 years for breaking probation but this is a bad meme just because it's still unjustified

          [–][deleted]  (7 children)

          [deleted]

            [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

            it's also not a law, he just said judges don't like guys coming back for violating parole. a good judge would have just saw him arrested for weed and let him go with no charge

            [–]King_Brutus 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

            a good judge

            would have upheld the laws and case results that exist. Just because we don't like what judges do doesn't make them "not good judges".

            [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

            see a bad law don't uphold it

            plus include the rest of my quote, that lawyer in the meme said it wasn't a law just that judges do it out of anger

            [–]King_Brutus 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

            I'm just broadly stating that judges are responsible for upholding laws and it shouldn't be up to them to disagree or agree with them based on the situation. That's not how balance of power should work.

            [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

            judges have a lot of leeway and the lawyer is right about that. Nowadays weed is being legalized in a lot of places. In some other places it is still illegal but not really enforced so in that way you might as well say in effect it is legal. I think the meme would be better if there was a law saying you need 5 years in jail if you break probation on a weed charge. There is not tho so of course the lawyer must have known that and didn't say it. As it is the lawyer wanted to disagree with meme number 1 showing the black guy getting screwed and the white guy getting a pretty easy deal for rape. But why did lawyer want to make that point? It's a bad point.

            [–]King_Brutus 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

            I may be arguing beyond the immediate topic, but sentencing and charging are two different things. Charging someone for a crime should be based exclusively in the laws and case law, but sentencing can be subjective to the judge (which is where minimum sentencing comes in).

            I don't agree with either of the judges sentencing decisions, but the meme makes it sound like a judge just arbitrarily threw the book at a black guy for DOING WEED when it was really because he violated his probation (which five years still seems excessive but hey). The manipulation of the narrative while ignoring any nuance is what makes the meme disingenuous.

            [–]RedEyedWarrior 9 insightful - 6 fun9 insightful - 5 fun10 insightful - 6 fun -  (0 children)

            "Excuse me, Sweaty, but I'm trying to push a narrative here!" - Reddit mods.

            [–]Blended_Scotch 6 insightful - 4 fun6 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 4 fun -  (0 children)

            The same shitty mods dictating the same shitty content

            [–]lmaonope333 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

            Brock Turner deserved more than six months in prison

            [–]america_first_1776 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

            He didn't deserve any prison time. The allegations against him were fucking stupid.

            [–]4832992718349 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

            Thanks for the info.

            Enables me to friend smart commenters and browse that way rather than to subscribe to "subreddits". His comments are still up on his user page.

            https://www.reddit.com/user/dekachin6?count=25&after=t1_fy3pfu4

            [–]piss 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

            I can't stand images like this where it is two unrelated, unfounded claims/cases that are supposed to be juxtaposed and telling of a deeper point that people spread to push agendas. It feels like I see them constantly all over the internet. Simplistic comparisons like that that remove all context or often even just plain fact are for morons, regardless of it is representing something you agree with or disagree with. I find it really aggravating when I see people use things like that to make a point and immediately lose all respect for anything they are saying. Nothing is black white and not everything is related just because you put them next to each other on a meme.

            [–]PencilPusher55 3 insightful - 4 fun3 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 4 fun -  (3 children)

            Bruh amerikkka racist af tho....

            [–][deleted]  (2 children)

            [deleted]

              [–]Antifa 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

              Look at OPs post history. OP is being sardonic.

              [–]cisheteroscum 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

              Reddit is just an apologetic propaganda arm of the establishment at this point. There is no factual discourse allowed at all unless it's explicitly anti-white, pro-degeneracy, and doesn't hurt the corporate bottom line

              [–]Dragonerne 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

              They banned GC because it believes in biology. Wouldn't want white women to get the wrong ideas...

              [–]Canardyyy 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

              Reddit is the new Facebook.

              [–]Dr_Bukkake 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

              Because nobody checks for facts anymore, they are constantly looking to be upset so when presented a situation like this which obviously doesn’t makes sense they fly off the handle and claim injustice instead of taking a minute to look into the cases. It’s like the video from a few weeks ago of the white woman in the parking lot pointing a gun at some black chicks, that’s literally how the video started and nobody took a second to ask how this situation happened. People were calling for this lady’s job and looking to ruin her life for what they perceived was racism. Next day the full video comes out and shows the woman was justified in her actions and it was actually the black chicks who were racist and escalated the situation but that was it, the story was dropped and everyone moved on to the next “injustice.”

              [–]autumnspruce 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

              I think the meme is still justified. If weed had been legal to begin with, Worsley wouldn't have gotten probation, so then he wouldn't have had any problems with violating probation or not showing up to court, and he wouldn't have ended up in jail for 5 years. So his sentence is still ultimately unjust as it derives from an unjust law (prohibition of weed) that shouldn't have been there to begin with.

              [–]jet199 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

              Even if weed is legal it's always going to be controlled.

              Edit: you certainly are always going to get arrested for driving stoned.

              [–]ExBootlicker 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

              This is how reddit mods and admins create a circle jerk where nobody is free to question the narrative of the 'innocent black man being kept down by the white man'

              It is still bullshit for anybody to serve any time for a victimless crime...

              [–]Tortoise 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

              I mean, any amount of time is bullshit for weed, but even still, to claim he got 5 years for possession is hot bullshit.

              [–]Shadow_Death 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

              You were banned from r/Politics? Shocker... that's a cesspool of hate for anyone who doesn't think like them. I feel like they're the same people who post all the misinformation to Facebook.

              [–]mongre 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

              Gotta read it till the end to get the punchline haha.

              [–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

              For more on this story: /s/Marijuana/comments/5gqq/veteran_living_a_nightmare_created_by_joe_biden/

              [–]bagano1 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

              Reddit and other sites subscribe to this bullshit that black people are never guilty of anything. I kind of bought into this until I started working in the hood and knew liberal media was full of shit.

              And yes, no surprise he was banned. It's really high time for Congress to destroy these dot-coms and put them in their place. They have too much power. Also, many of them are outright scamming people.

              load more comments (3 replies)