A post trolling about a fictitious medical condition has been removed.

18 minutes ago, riclag said:

Once upon a time the Gov of NY unleashed the national guard to protect the subway travelers from the criminal, drug and mental health afflicted !

 

 

I was in NY under mayor Giuliani's reign. What a fantastic place. Crime was very rare, you could happily walk around after dark. Subways were safe, criminals were punished instead of good samaritans. Violent criminals didnt get a pass because of the amount of melanin in their skin. 

Of course, thanks to this Giuliani is a pariah now. 

10 minutes ago, SunnyinBangrak said:

I was in NY under mayor Giuliani's reign. What a fantastic place. Crime was very rare, you could happily walk around after dark. Subways were safe, criminals were punished instead of good samaritans. Violent criminals didnt get a pass because of the amount of melanin in their skin. 

Of course, thanks to this Giuliani is a pariah now. 

Once considered America’s mayor until he sided with 45/47.

Maybe theres a chance for a comeback!

11 hours ago, Evil Penevil said:

Yup, the Daniel Penny effect has been given as a reason why bystanders were unwilling to aid the woman.  But long before Daniel Penny's case attracted so much attention, New Yorkers had been hesitant to render any help to victims of subway crime.  Basically, they fear the consquences of getting involved in a criminal matter.

 

Critics say bystanders stood by while illegal migrant allegedly burned woman to death on NYC subway: ‘Daniel Penny effect’

 

“Nobody came to her aid,” said Guardian Angels founder and community activist Curtis Sliwa. “There’s no doubt that people don’t want to get involved. It’s the Daniel Penny factor. It’s frozen people. They’re saying to themselves: ‘I don’t want to get jammed up like Penny.

“People should have been running over to the woman on fire. They did nothing. They said nothing,” Sliwa said, calling the reluctance of bystanders to intervene “the Daniel Penny effect.”

https://www.yahoo.com/news/critics-bystanders-stood-while-illegal-231041397.html

 

To be far, that's in part to the US suing culture, which has been going on for decades. 

16 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Another senseless act of violence that could have been prevented with secure borders.

More senseless rhetoric. Its not as if every illegal crossing the borders is setting people on fire.

14 hours ago, mdr224 said:

No leftists going to be posting in this thread

Yeah, left leaning people who believe in equality and equal justice and opportunities are not going to condemn somebody setting an innocent person on fire. What is wrong with you????

Why bring politics in to this? A horrible crime and a horrible horrible death. Take your petty attempt at political point scoring and shove it where it belongs. Sick.

Maybe the extreme Leftists will somehow blame the victim?

 

Or blame rational, empathetic people for coming down hard on the perp and wanting justice?

 

"Inclusion and tolerance"

 

Hopefully the poor woman's soul got the hell outta her body before long...

2 hours ago, josephbloggs said:

Yeah, left leaning people who believe in equality and equal justice and opportunities are not going to condemn somebody setting an innocent person on fire. What is wrong with you????

Why bring politics in to this? A horrible crime and a horrible horrible death. Take your petty attempt at political point scoring and shove it where it belongs. Sick.

Oh please !

The offender had a mental illness ,he deserves a very long time in a treatment facility rather than a jail.

 

7 hours ago, Hamus Yaigh said:

More senseless rhetoric. Its not as if every illegal crossing the borders is setting people on fire.

Tell that bit of wisdom to the lady on fire

7 hours ago, josephbloggs said:

Yeah, left leaning people who believe in equality and equal justice and opportunities are not going to condemn somebody setting an innocent person on fire. What is wrong with you????

Why bring politics in to this? A horrible crime and a horrible horrible death. Take your petty attempt at political point scoring and shove it where it belongs. Sick.

Leftists are responsible for this womans death. Biden and the people who keep voting democrat

January 20th can't come fast enough 

8 hours ago, Hamus Yaigh said:

More senseless rhetoric. Its not as if every illegal crossing the borders is setting people on fire.

 

Would that be the point at which you would agree borders should be secured? 😆

 

Or would it need to be more serious?

9 hours ago, Hamus Yaigh said:

More senseless rhetoric. Its not as if every illegal crossing the borders is setting people on fire.

Well this poor woman would be alive today if we had a secure border. You from the USA by any chance?

6 hours ago, georgegeorgia said:

Oh please !

The offender had a mental illness ,he deserves a very long time in a treatment facility rather than a jail.

 

Oh please ! (this was all avoidable)
The accused offender was previously deported in 2018 ... should never have been allowed to re-enter, don't they have treatment in his country?

The correct number of women set on fire on the subway is zero.

Actions have consequences, he's a murderer.

5 hours ago, Celsius said:

January 20th can't come fast enough 

Its gonna take more then God, Jesus, Trump & Musk to clean up whats been goin on in that hell hole.

 

https://www.thecity.nyc/2024/02/13/sanctuary-city-explainer-nyc/

 After seeing what Penny went through my thoughts on getting involved have changed.  The thought of me just jumping in and assisting has been tempered.  My gut reaction is if I was on that train I would have tried to assist the lady on fire. As I recall most subway trains have fire extinguishers?  Did anyone at least look for the extinguisher?  The more I think about this incident the more it disturbs me.  

 

In terms of not getting involved I guess one might think about these scenarios. On a subway one can exit at the next station or run to another carriage.  On a moving bus the only option would be break the window and jump? On a moving train the only option is the next carriage.  Or wait for the nesxt station. The most vulnerable place would be an airplane at 30,000 feet.  In this instance I would get involved. I guess one must decide before such an incident occurrs.

 

Lastly the suspect's immigration is secondary.  Yes if the suspect was not in the country then he would not have been on the subway.  But there many in America who are legal who are  just as capable of doing the same. 

20 hours ago, sqwakvfr said:

 After seeing what Penny went through my thoughts on getting involved have changed.  The thought of me just jumping in and assisting has been tempered. 

You wouldn't help because a man killed someone who wasn't being violent but was shouting at people, and the man went to trial and got acquitted. There was no reason to kill him at all.

If you kill someone you shouldn't go to trial??  

24 minutes ago, josephbloggs said:

You wouldn't help because a man killed someone who wasn't being violent but was shouting at people, and the man went to trial and got acquitted. There was no reason to kill him at all.

If you kill someone you shouldn't go to trial??  

So Daniel Penny intended to killy Jordan Neely?  So you were in the same subway carriage and can confirm Neely was not violent and did not pose a threat to anyone?  Wow, you must have been in NY at the same time?  I never said I would not get involved. I said I have doubts about getting directly involved after what Penny went through.

6 minutes ago, sqwakvfr said:

So Daniel Penny intended to killy Jordan Neely?  So you were in the same subway carriage and can confirm Neely was not violent and did not pose a threat to anyone?  Wow, you must have been in NY at the same time?  I never said I would not get involved. I said I have doubts about getting directly involved after what Penny went through.

Where did I say he intended to kill him? But the fact is he did kill him. If somebody kills someone it deserves to be looked at. In this case he was acquitted. So I ask you again where's the problem with that? Why do you think "Penny" suffered? (You keep referring to what he "went through" like it shouldn't have happened. What about what his victim went through?

And no, I wasn't in the carriage as I am here, in Bangkok. I read the same reports as you as I assume you weren't there either. Reports say Jordan was acting erratically and shouting. There were no reports of him being violent.

So, again, I ask you, if you kill someone you shouldn't go to trial??  

56 minutes ago, josephbloggs said:

Where did I say he intended to kill him? But the fact is he did kill him. If somebody kills someone it deserves to be looked at. In this case he was acquitted. So I ask you again where's the problem with that? Why do you think "Penny" suffered? (You keep referring to what he "went through" like it shouldn't have happened. What about what his victim went through?

And no, I wasn't in the carriage as I am here, in Bangkok. I read the same reports as you as I assume you weren't there either. Reports say Jordan was acting erratically and shouting. There were no reports of him being violent.

So, again, I ask you, if you kill someone you shouldn't go to

So are you talking  about murder( the killing of another with prior intent) or are you talking about the death of another during course of protecting others?  Which is it? Daniel Penny feared Jordan Neely posed a threat to passengers on the subway so he he put Neeely in a control hold and waited and waited for the tranist police officer to show up. So this means to you that Penny is now guilty of murder?  The jury found him not guilty of 2nd degree murder and this was a just verdict. 

 

Have you personally dealt with an "erractic and loud person"?  I have many times and these nonviolent people can turn violent in the blink of an eye.  I have over 20 years of dealing with people who were not violent until they became violent.  

So how many years of dealing with "nonviolent" people do you have? I have two decades of worth in the streets of Los Angeles. I can absolutely relate to Daniel Penny. Can you? 

 

Yes, If someone commits homicide that cannot be justified then they should go to prison.  But Daniel Penny's actions were justified.  The jury felt the same way. 

On 12/24/2024 at 11:09 AM, James105 said:

 

The Daniel Penny effect?  Maybe people saw that trial and even if they did want to help would probably weigh up the risks of being arrested and tried for doing so.   Too high risk to help strangers in that city I think.  

Was also my first thoughts when watching the vid. The cop walking straight by along with others, nobody helping and the murderer actually fanning the flames of the woman with his jacket.

 

Critics warn of 'Daniel Penny effect’ after woman burned alive on NYC subway car as bystanders watched
Video of the horrifying murder showed several people standing by as the woman burned

https://www.foxnews.com/us/critics-warn-daniel-penny-effect-after-woman-burned-alive-nyc-subway-car-bystanders-watched

51 minutes ago, sqwakvfr said:

So are you talking  about murder( the killing of another with prior intent) or are you talking about the death of another during course of protecting others?  Which is it? Daniel Penny feared Jordan Neely posed a threat to passengers on the subway so he he put Neeely in a control hold and waited and waited for the tranist police officer to show up. So this means to you that Penny is now guilty of murder?  The jury found him not guilty of 2nd degree murder and this was a just verdict. 

 

Have you personally dealt with an "erractic and loud person"?  I have many times and these nonviolent people can turn violent in the blink of an eye.  I have over 20 years of dealing with people who were not violent until they became violent.  

So how many years of dealing with "nonviolent" people do you have? I have two decades of worth in the streets of Los Angeles. I can absolutely relate to Daniel Penny. Can you? 

 

Yes, If someone commits homicide that cannot be justified then they should go to prison.  But Daniel Penny's actions were justified.  The jury felt the same way. 

Ok Mr Tough Streets, let's leave it there as you keep moving the goalposts and twisting words. I initially replied to you when you implied it was wrong what Penny "had to go through". My point was absolutely he should have to go through that. Someone died at his hands. It is called a trial. And they reached a verdict. And now everyone moves on (apart from the guy who is dead, obviously).

It wasn't premeditated murder and he wasn't charged with it. 

Love the "not violent until they are" comment. So he was killed because he might have become violent but hadn't?

I don't think he intended to kill him. I think he stepped in to do a duty. I also think he used unnecessary, excessive and prolonged force when the man was already subdued and there was no threat to the public and it resulted in a man's death. He rightly went to trial and the jury made their verdict, end of story. Your initial post implied he shouldn't have had to go through that, but absolutely he should.

 

On 12/24/2024 at 9:30 AM, mdr224 said:

No leftists going to be posting in this thread

The USA is a dangerous place, mass shootings, millions of people with addictions, millions more and people who will just watch a woman burn to death and render no assistance.

 

I find it hard to believe everyone at the scene was a so called “leftist”.

 

 

 

Just now, MalcolmB said:

The USA is a dangerous place, mass shootings, millions of people with addictions, millions more and people who will just watch a woman burn to death and render no assistance.

 

I find it hard to believe everyone at the scene was a so called “leftist”.

 

 

 

You could say the exact same thing about Thailand and many other countries.

17 minutes ago, josephbloggs said:

Ok Mr Tough Streets, let's leave it there as you keep moving the goalposts and twisting words. I initially replied to you when you implied it was wrong what Penny "had to go through". My point was absolutely he should have to go through that. Someone died at his hands. It is called a trial. And they reached a verdict. And now everyone moves on.

It wasn't premeditated murder and he wasn't charged with it. 

Love the "not violent until they are" comment. So he was killed because he might have become violent but hadn't?

I don't think he intended to kill him. I think he stepped in to do a duty. I also think he used unnecessary, excessive and prolonged force when the man was already subdued and there was no threat to the public and it resulted in a man's death. He rightly went to trial and the jury made their verdict, end of story. Your initial post implied he shouldn't have had to go through that, but absolutely he should.

 

Since you and I were not there so only the other passengers could testifty to Penny's actions and  Neely's behavior.  Some testified at his trial. The jury considered the totality of the evidence and rendered a verdict.  Due Process was achieved.  Still it was an orderal for Daniel Penny. If I was Daniel Penny I would have gone bankrupt paying lawyers to defend myself. This is now called the "Daniel Penny" effect.  AKA Do not get involved.  I have seen similar cases in my time in LA where the District Attorny did not file charges. So this is my perspective. Lastly I have never been called "Mr. Tough Streets" because I never was.  People who aspired to be "tough" rarely lasted in my former profession.  

1 hour ago, josephbloggs said:

Ok Mr Tough Streets, let's leave it there as you keep moving the goalposts and twisting words. I initially replied to you when you implied it was wrong what Penny "had to go through". My point was absolutely he should have to go through that. Someone died at his hands. It is called a trial. And they reached a verdict. And now everyone moves on (apart from the guy who is dead, obviously).

It wasn't premeditated murder and he wasn't charged with it. 

Love the "not violent until they are" comment. So he was killed because he might have become violent but hadn't?

I don't think he intended to kill him. I think he stepped in to do a duty. I also think he used unnecessary, excessive and prolonged force when the man was already subdued and there was no threat to the public and it resulted in a man's death. He rightly went to trial and the jury made their verdict, end of story. Your initial post implied he shouldn't have had to go through that, but absolutely he should.

 

Unfortunately your argument that he "has to go through that" falls over quite quickly when compared to a man who stabbed someone on a subway in "self defence" and killed him.   No charges and no trial by jury.  Perhaps you can shed some light into why this person did not have to go through what you believe Daniel Penny definitely did have to go through.  

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/charges-dropped-jordan-williams-nyc-man-accused-fatal-subway-stabbing-rcna91780

6 hours ago, James105 said:

Perhaps you can shed some light into why this person did not have to go through what you believe Daniel Penny definitely did have to go through.  

 

 

The Jordan Williams incident was Black-on-Black.  No one in the Black community felt sorry for the guy who was stabbed. There was no community pressure to have Williams charged.

Another one, fortunately survived.

 

Man, 67, 'intentionally' burned in New York's Penn Station

A man was burned inside Manhattan's Penn Station train terminal on Friday, just days after a woman was set ablaze inside a Brooklyn subway car. 

Metropolitan Transportation Authority police received a report of a man on fire at the transit hub just before 8pm, and when officers arrived on the scene, they found a 67-year-old man on fire near the entrance to the subway, according to the New York Daily News.  

He had burn injuries to both her legs and upper body, which a fire department spokesman told the New York Times were serious but not life threatening.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14231583/Man-intentionally-burned-New-York-Penn-Station.html

You snooze you loose.  Keep your eyes open on the subway.