Is he some kind of joke to you?
Be the punchline you want to tell.

I think he needs to work on his interpersonal skills though.

Cathartic for the character at the very least.

Originally posted by DarkCrystalMethod:

Is he some kind of joke to you?
Be the punchline you want to tell.

I think he needs to work on his interpersonal skills though.

This is a strange comment. What caused it?

Originally posted by Robot11024:

Originally posted by DarkCrystalMethod:

Is he some kind of joke to you?
Be the punchline you want to tell.

I think he needs to work on his interpersonal skills though.

This is a strange comment. What caused it?

I didn't see that movie. Thought I'd wing it with some Ghandi stuff.

Joker is still the bad guy even though he is portrayed in a positive light in that movie(or so I have heard)

it is my understanding that killing someone in self defence even in usa can be a bit of a legal grey area. the first two guys are justified because if he did not do something they would probably have beaten him to death, but he actively hunted down and murdered the third one. that alone would have ruined any self defence claim

Originally posted by DarkCrystalMethod:

Originally posted by Robot11024:

This is a strange comment. What caused it?

I didn't see that movie. Thought I'd wing it with some Ghandi stuff.

Joker is still the bad guy even though he is portrayed in a positive light in that movie(or so I have heard)

Ohh, okay. I'm not very educated, so I don't know about people like Ghandi. I think he wears sandals though

Originally posted by DarkCrystalMethod:

Originally posted by Robot11024:

This is a strange comment. What caused it?

I didn't see that movie. Thought I'd wing it with some Ghandi stuff.

Joker is still the bad guy even though he is portrayed in a positive light in that movie(or so I have heard)

He wasn't really meant to be.
It's just that more people related to him than the director wanted and a lot of his actions seem pretty justified based on the world portrayed on-screen.

Originally posted by salamander:

it is my understanding that killing someone in self defence even in usa can be a bit of a legal grey area. the first two guys are justified because if he did not do something they would probably have beaten him to death, but he actively hunted down and murdered the third one. that alone would have ruined any self defence claim

this is correct. you can't chase down and attack a retreating assailant.

The first 2 were legal and justified. The 3rd was neither, but also arguably cathartic

whats that

Bernie Goetz. . . .

Originally posted by Mina:

whats that

Something not good I think.

Haven't watched it. Going by the description, self-defense is using enough force to protect yourself in the moment and no more than that. Most self-defense laws assume a duty to retreat because of that. Some jurisdictions also have castle doctrine, where you have the right to stand your ground in certain locations you have the absolute right to be such as your home or maybe your workplace though, and that vaguely makes sense because how do you retreat without knowing where to go to be safe?

Nevertheless, by the time you're going out of your way to hunt somebody down you're going beyond that scope, so minimally the third guy should have lived and the Joker should face at least one count of murder from the ordeal.

it's a very good movie but may be hard to watch for some. it's very dark. i recommend watching it :)
sequel is ass though, avoid that one

Originally posted by Jazz:

it's a very good movie but may be hard to watch for some. it's very dark. i recommend watching it :)
sequel is ass though, avoid that one

many such cases