snopes.com  

Go Back   snopes.com > SLC Central > Moot Court

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 30 December 2018, 07:59 PM
RichardM RichardM is offline
 
Join Date: 27 March 2004
Location: Las Cruces, NM
Posts: 4,671
Default

I don't know if we can know what her opinion on being willing to die was.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 30 December 2018, 09:35 PM
St. Alia St. Alia is offline
 
Join Date: 06 October 2010
Location: St. Paul, MN
Posts: 881
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by UEL View Post
Ms Hellyer did not put herself out to die in support of the cause. She was killed while supporting that cause. To me that makes a distinct difference in martyrdom. If she went to the rally that day willing to die over a statue coming down, then indeed, she'd be a martyr. I doubt she did.
Emphasis mine.

Why did you phrase her presence there that way?

You minimize her activism and brush aside any belief that she would be willing to put her life on the line to promote civil rights and equality, and in the next paragraph hold up MLK as an example and say that calling Ms. Heyer a martyr diminishes people like him?

It seems patronizing to doubt that an adult woman may choose to engage in a potentially dangerous situation because she has strong beliefs about standing up against Nazis, racism, and white supremacism.

From Wiki-(feel free to backtrack the links, I figured it was good enough since it was quotes from people who knew her.)
Quote:
Her friends described her "as a passionate advocate for the disenfranchised who was often moved to tears by the world's injustices", and said that she "spoke out against inequality and urged co-workers to be active in their community".[30] According to Heyer's mother Susan Bro, Heyer would ask people of opposing views why they had come to their beliefs. Bro said that she and Heyer advocated for Black Lives Matter, which Bro said fights for equal treatment.[32]
snip
Heyer and a longtime friend of hers had agreed not to protest the Unite the Right rally, because they thought it would be too dangerous, but the night before the protests, Heyer felt compelled to go.
The Unite the Right rally wasn't a bunch of frat boys getting together protesting against the removal of Confederate statues because of their belief in free speech.

Quote:
The Unite the Right rally, also known as the Charlottesville rally or Charlottesville riots,[4] was a white supremacist[5][6][7][8] rally that occurred in Charlottesville, Virginia, from August 11 to 12, 2017.[9][10] Protesters were members of the far-right and included self-identified members of the alt-right,[11] neo-Confederates,[12] neo-fascists,[13] white nationalists,[14] neo-Nazis,[15] and various militias.[16] The marchers chanted racist and antisemitic slogans, carried semi-automatic rifles, swastikas, Nazi symbols (such as the Odal rune, Black Sun, and Iron Cross), the Valknut, Confederate battle flags, Deus Vult crosses, flags and other symbols of various past and present anti-Muslim and antisemitic groups.[17][8][9][18][19][20][21] Within the Charlottesville area, the rally is often known as A12[22] or 8/12.[23] The organizers' stated goals included unifying the American white nationalist movement[11] and to oppose removing a statue of Robert E. Lee from Charlottesville's Emancipation Park.[20][24]

The rally occurred amidst the backdrop of controversy generated by the removal of Confederate monuments throughout the country in response to the Charleston church shooting in 2015.[7]
People had already died because of the beliefs and acts of these assholes. People have died for hundreds of years in this country because of these assholes.
Expecting, or at least not being surprised by, violence from them is not something you need a crystal ball to foresee. And she went anyway. She went to stand up against Nazis, fascism, white supremacism, and bigotry.

But if calling her a "martyr" doesn't work for some, that's fine with me personally. But minimizing her or dismissing her ideals as not being good enough while misstating the situation...yeah, that's not fine with me personally.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 30 December 2018, 10:40 PM
ASL's Avatar
ASL ASL is offline
 
Join Date: 04 July 2003
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 5,979
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardM View Post
I don't know if we can know what her opinion on being willing to die was.
I think thatís a very valid point. I mean, we could ask her, but oh wait, sheís been murdered.

Frankly, none of us know whether she was or wasnít willing to die for her cause, only that she did. Not that I think itís required for the purposes of martyrdom (maybe the word has been tainted by martyr-seeking religionists who actively look for ways to die for their beliefs) but when in doubt, intent (willingness) follows the bullet, no?
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 31 December 2018, 01:50 AM
Mouse's Avatar
Mouse Mouse is offline
 
Join Date: 10 July 2003
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 7,591
Mouse

Quote:
Originally Posted by ASL View Post
Whatís your evidence for that claim? Specifically the chaser down by thugs and panicked part?
Iím a bit curious about this myself, even if I know I shouldnít. Indulging my morbid curiosity never ends well, yet I keep doing it.

This feels like an echo of an argument some of the alt-Right assholes have made. In the days that followed, a few tried to do some turd-polishing, claiming that Heather Heyer actually died because she saw the car coming towards her and freaked out, causing her to suffer a heart attack and die. Aside from not being true, Iím like, ďUm, guys, even if thatís true, Iím fairly certain it still qualifies as murder. Because in the scenario you describe, she still died because of the NFBSKing car. A prosecutor could easily argue that she would still be alive were it not for the asshole who steered a car towards her, and therefore, it still counts as murder, you NFBSKs.Ē

Oh and St. Alia, while I probably should contribute more to your post than just glowing praise, I still feel I should give you kudos. Quibble all you like over the exact definition of the word, martyr, and whether Heather Heyer qualifies, but do not blithely dismiss the ideals she fought and died for.

Plus, as I brought up in my previous post in this thread, were it not for Heyerís death, I wonder if the media would have continued to treat the alt-Right NFBSKwads as a bunch of cheeky provocateurs. I mean who would have thought they actually meant all that Nazi stuff and that a bunch of people talking endlessly about how all who oppose them, will die, might actually kill someone who opposed them?
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 31 December 2018, 02:57 AM
crocoduck_hunter's Avatar
crocoduck_hunter crocoduck_hunter is offline
 
Join Date: 27 May 2009
Location: Roseburg, OR
Posts: 13,148
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ASL View Post
I think thatís a very valid point. I mean, we could ask her, but oh wait, sheís been murdered.

Frankly, none of us know whether she was or wasnít willing to die for her cause, only that she did.
And ultimately, the same can be said of many people who were killed for their beliefs. We can't know that they didn't have second thoughts before their deaths, only that they believed in a cause and were killed for that cause.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 03 January 2019, 07:38 PM
ASL's Avatar
ASL ASL is offline
 
Join Date: 04 July 2003
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 5,979
Vanishing

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thebobo View Post
I am not convinced (despite what a jury concluded) that it was deliberate. He was chased down by thugs like him and he panicked. He could have taken out a lot more if he wanted to.
I think it’s worth noting that Thebobo has yet to provide any justification or evidence for this POV.

For my part, because I care about the truth, all I’ve been able to come up with is some dubious interpretations of the video that shows the murder-vehicle speeding into the crowd from behind. The alternative interpretation being that the asshole driving the car was just innocently approaching a thickly packed mass of people with no ill intent, and then only hit the gas and sped towards the crowd after someone on the street leading to the crowd (which was also pretty congested with pedestrians) swung a bat at the back of his car, and that this swinging bat justified his flight into a crowd of people as self-defense.

Yeah, I’m not buying it either (and apparently neither did the jury, if that claim was even raised by the defense).

Last edited by ASL; 03 January 2019 at 07:46 PM. Reason: sp
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 03 January 2019, 08:06 PM
GenYus234's Avatar
GenYus234 GenYus234 is offline
 
Join Date: 02 August 2005
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 26,695
Default

IANAL, but AIUI, self defense can never* be used to justify actions (intentional or accidental) against a third party.

* As in, the laws explicitly state that.

ETA: For example, Arizona law 13-404 is: "...a person is justified in threatening or using physical force against another when and to the extent a reasonable person would believe that physical force is immediately necessary to protect himself against the other's use or attempted use of unlawful physical force."

Note that the way self-defense usually works is that the self-defense action is illegal except for the narrowly carved out exception. Since the Arizona exception does not permit threatening or using force against a third-party, it would be the same as if no threat existed.

FETA: The bat-hitting might alter the charges if the defendant could establish a temporary non-competent state of mind due to panic or such.

Last edited by GenYus234; 03 January 2019 at 08:12 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 03 January 2019, 10:12 PM
ASL's Avatar
ASL ASL is offline
 
Join Date: 04 July 2003
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 5,979
Default

It would probably be best to cite VA self-defense statutes (and I believe someone mentioned that VA allows for imperfect self-defense as a form of mitigation) but I am both not a lawyer an not super interested in digging through the statutes, particularly as an actual lawyer has already had a chance to present such a claim to a jury and failed to come away with a reduced charge or an acquittal and I happen to think the jury came to a just conclusion.

But it sure does seem like a great opportunity for Thebobo to jump back into the thread, if he’s interested in having an actual conversation, rather than posting conspiracy theory-like insinuations about the validity of the charges and the conviction while presenting no supporting evidence.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 03 January 2019, 11:19 PM
GenYus234's Avatar
GenYus234 GenYus234 is offline
 
Join Date: 02 August 2005
Location: Mesa, AZ
Posts: 26,695
Default

Good point, except Virginia law does not seem to define what constitutes self-defense. The Virginia Supreme Court decision in McGhee v Commmonweath (the decision in 1978, there are several with the same name) said:

"The law of self-defense is the law of necessity, and the necessity relied upon must not arise out of defendant's own misconduct. Accordingly, a defendant must reasonably fear death or serious bodily harm to himself at the hands of his victim. It is not essential to the right of self-defense that the danger should in fact exist. If it reasonably appears to a defendant that the danger exists, he has the right to defend against it to the same extent, and under the same rules, as would obtain in case the danger is real. A defendant may always act upon reasonable appearance of danger, and whether the danger is reasonably apparent is always to be determined from the viewpoint of the defendant at the time he acted. " [bolding mine]

So, if someone did strike his car with a bat, he could have been justified in running that person over. But not justified in running over a different person.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 04 January 2019, 01:50 AM
Mouse's Avatar
Mouse Mouse is offline
 
Join Date: 10 July 2003
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 7,591
Mouse

Quote:
Originally Posted by ASL View Post
But it sure does seem like a great opportunity for Thebobo to jump back into the thread, if heís interested in having an actual conversation, rather than posting conspiracy theory-like insinuations about the validity of the charges and the conviction while presenting no supporting evidence.
We should be tactful and give Thebobo the chance, but Iím not going to hold my breath. His posts feel like the message board equivalent of Erisís golden apple. He makes his claim, gets us all fired up, then slips away.

In any case, is he arguing that the guy was so panicked by another crowd that he plowed into a completely different one? It still doesnít speak well of the driver.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
An attempt to put Charlottesville into a coherent video Jusenkyo no Pikachu Soapbox Derby 29 05 April 2018 06:35 PM
Charlottesville police refused to protect synagogue from Nazis Sue Soapbox Derby 52 25 August 2017 07:46 PM
Boy Scouts of America to begin accepting transgender boys GenYus234 Social Studies 3 31 January 2017 03:55 PM
Net providers begin warning of illegal downloads snopes Techno-Babble 0 26 February 2013 01:09 AM
Where did stone soup begin? Aud 1 Food 8 06 April 2008 03:06 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:10 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.