I'll play devils advocate here. We have no audio and no testimony from the victim or witnesses in the article. He only exits the van when she walks away.
He could have been unjustifiably distracted, hit the girl, was collecting himself to get out of the van, and then she just walked away. So he gets out and says, "what the hell, you can't just walk away from something like that. We need to call an ambulance or get you to a hospital or something" and her, being a teenager who would rather not engage at all would brush it off with "no, I'm fine, fuck off".
What do you do? You can't detain the girl. So she leaves and what? You call the cops and say "I fucked up and hit someone with my van." Who does that help? Now shes lost in the crowd. You can't just stay there, so you drive away. What else is there to do?
He's 100% guilty of hitting a pedestrian who was plainly walking in a clearly marked crosswalk where it is likely busy with other highschool students as there are clearly others in the video. Don't get me wrong, fuck that guy. We can fairly judge him on that account. And that verbal interaction absolutely could have been him victim blaming, but that is conjecture. I'd believe any first hand witness over him, and pretty much any secondhand retelling from someone a witness spoke to. But we have no evidence whatsoever about what was said.
Which version of The Boy Who Cried Wolf did you have growing up? The one where Peter cries wolf and there's a wolf but it's in the woods so the townsfolk do nothing, then the townsfolk call Peter a wolf, and then when the wolf arrives in the village and starts taking people and Peter cries wolf the townsfolk say the word "wolf" is so overused it doesn't mean anything anymore?
But is he a rabid dog? A rabid dig is without hope; a once innocent creature killed by disease but left horrifically animated with no other purpose than to spread harm. A vampire is a rabid dog.
Frankenstein's monster hasn't learned to be human yet. He's been tragically thrust into existence with all the tools to cause harm and is expected to have the tools for self control but has been given none. He's a chimp with a handgun. People scream "stop that chimp with a handgun", and some point out the man that captured, transported, armed, and let loose the chimp, but to equate the two as equally liable is wildly absurd.
I think it works better for soup because soup is hotter to you than you are to ice cream.
And, moreover, when you blow on something, the air that hits the thing youre blowing on is much closer to the ambient air temperature than your internal body temperature.
But, yeah, on a scale of "Magic utopia where no one commits felonies" to "Real life dystopia where the law is corrupted and crime is fabricated to fill prisons for profit" I guess I'll take "government run prisons (try not to compare it to how they fund and run public education for children)"
I always felt like his blank stare was a "Oh fuck, oh god, I have no fucking idea what I'm doing, how did I let it get this far, oh fuck, be cool, they don't know, oh shit, I'm so completely out of my depth, oh fuck me man, they're going to find out, every second its getting worse but I can't back out now, oh fuck oh fuck oh fuck..." stare
It's a lot of memorization that I simply haven't done and won't ever have to do.
The fraction reduction doesn't help intuitive thought. If imperial operated on 'significant digits' and marked any set or document with a 64th always as 64ths, as in 16/64ths, I'd be more on board.
We just need to replace out base 10 system of counting with base 12 and we'd get the best of both worlds!
Not only that, but your system, by virtue of being decimal, inherits all the shortcomings of our quite flawed numbering system. You can't divide something by the second smallest prime number without breaking out repeating decimals.
What's more 0.203 cm or 0.291 cm?
How about 3/8" or 19/64"?
How far is 1/3 of a mile? 1/3 km is 333m. How about 1/9? 1/9 km is 111m
How long is 10 x 5/16"? 10 x 3.1cm is 31cm
Yeah, a foot breaks down easy in whole inches with many factors, but that's about it
I'll play devils advocate here. We have no audio and no testimony from the victim or witnesses in the article. He only exits the van when she walks away.
He could have been unjustifiably distracted, hit the girl, was collecting himself to get out of the van, and then she just walked away. So he gets out and says, "what the hell, you can't just walk away from something like that. We need to call an ambulance or get you to a hospital or something" and her, being a teenager who would rather not engage at all would brush it off with "no, I'm fine, fuck off".
What do you do? You can't detain the girl. So she leaves and what? You call the cops and say "I fucked up and hit someone with my van." Who does that help? Now shes lost in the crowd. You can't just stay there, so you drive away. What else is there to do?
He's 100% guilty of hitting a pedestrian who was plainly walking in a clearly marked crosswalk where it is likely busy with other highschool students as there are clearly others in the video. Don't get me wrong, fuck that guy. We can fairly judge him on that account. And that verbal interaction absolutely could have been him victim blaming, but that is conjecture. I'd believe any first hand witness over him, and pretty much any secondhand retelling from someone a witness spoke to. But we have no evidence whatsoever about what was said.
That's a ragebait title.