Las Vegas: Black Teens Reach Plea Deal In Beating Death of 17-year-old White Student
“the plea deal will allow all four teens to plead guilty as juveniles to manslaughter.”
In November, 2023, a mob of black youths accosted and beat to death 17-year-old Jonathan Lewis.
https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1723726108959359107
https://twitter.com/CollinRugg/status/1723755496103100713
Except they won’t get life in prison.
Remember the video that went viral last November of a white kid named Jonathan Lewis being beaten to death at his Vegas high school?
The four black kids who killed him were given a plea deal to voluntary manslaughter that will keep them from being tried as adults.
Look at my… pic.twitter.com/ynS24MWySE
— Greg Price (@greg_price11) August 2, 2024
The mother of the Las Vegas teen beaten to death by a gang of bullies last year furiously called out the county’s district attorney for allowing her son’s alleged killers to “get away with murder” after it was ruled they would no longer face prosecution as adults.
Mellisa Ready was horrified when she found out the Clark County District Attorney accepted a plea deal on Thursday that would ensure the four teens charged with the death of her son, Jonathan Lewis, would avoid being locked up in an adult prison, 8 News Now reported, citing court documents.
“There is no justice for my son Jonathan Lewis, that was stomped to death and murdered while 20 people stood there and did nothing more than film it and broadcast it to social media,” Ready told the outlet.
Lewis’ alleged killers — Damien Hernandez, Dontral Beaver, Gianni Robinson, and Treavion Randolph — were all under 18 when they were formally charged with second-degree murder in connection to the 17-year-old’s death.
However, the plea deal will allow all four teens to plead guilty as juveniles to manslaughter.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
What a disgusting country we have become
Expect more of this of Harris is not stopped
I respectfully disagree. it matters not one whit who is in the White House. This sort of thing has gone on for many years, including in Trump’s time.
The ONLY thing that will get the message across is street justice. Those “children” need to be found, taken out to the desert, and I think you can fill in the rest as I want this comment to pass muster.
Trump was making a change, but the democrats put in commie AG’s, and allow murder for free
Dont blame Trump
Believe me, it’s on his menu
Who says I blame Trump? Dear m, Gonz, don’t scream when you aren’t being hurt.
Because you felt a need to mention him, but I do think leadership and direction can play a big part.
People want safety, they want peace, if electing a President who believes in law and order and getting AG’s in the slates that will prosecute to the fullest, we have a chance
Would help if children had sane fathers in the family
You dared mention Trump in other than the most flowery and flattering light….here she comes, charge!
Healthguy: I know. I have blasphemed.
That needs to change, I bet these boys go on to kill again, largely because of poor parenting and culture.
I think they probably won’t kill again — but “probably” is not good enough.
Lack of justice leads to vigilantism. Vigilantism sometimes leads to getting the wrong person.
Yes, that’s why we do not want vigilantism. But the Democrats want to defund the police, keep letting child rapists and murderers run free, and at some point, people will take the law into their own hands. The left counts on this, wants it more than anything.
They NEED a reason to . . . well, you know. So we can’t do that, give them what they crave and NEED most to complete their “fundamental transformation” via their “revolution.” That’s suicide. Not (just) for us, but for our country. They want to undermine our Constitution by forcing our hand. We hold firm to peace and integrity and refuse their crazy, as Americans did in the 30s and 60s when pressed just as hard if not harder, and they lose again. The same way. There has to be a “revolution” or something they can quell for them to get to the next stage. Don’t be their pawn, their patsy, their twink.
They want Federal Police in cities. They’ll call it the Committee for State Security.
No doubt our police and the courts get it right every time.
No doubt being in a state like Texas or Florida beats being in a California Prison for the remainder of your life?
Danny: huh?
Frankly, I’d prefer that the 20 bystanders who filmed this and did nothing be executed.
Uhm… just try stepping in to stop something like this. Go ahead. Hit or otherwise harm one of these little darlings, and they will be long out of jail before you will. That is how it works in these here Yoo-Nited States in far too many jurisdictions.
It depends how you stop it. Leave no earthly opportunity for complaint.
I bet that those pricks planned this and that it was racial.
Blacks aren’t racist, don’t you know!
I. As a 20 year old female stepped up
And stopped a beating of a female by her drunk male friend in the middle of a very busy State Fair in Milwaukee Wisconsin in the 70’s
No one stopped to intervene, not even my bronze medal veteran of Viet Nam BF, or any other person in our posse, nor anyone else
The asshole stopped beating her reluctantly, and the 2 idiots walked off together.
My BF told me I was stupid, could have been killed, probably so, but despite not having a bronze medal, which he certainly earned, I’m not made that way…
Always wondered if the guy started to wail on me, would he have stepped in.. not a good thought to have.
How many years ago was this event where you intervened? I suspect you are referring to a cultural time and place far removed from our current society. If your story occurred today that dude would probably not be unwilling to add you to his ass kicking.
I already answers that question but I might add I have intervened additional times since and not been beaten.
Could it happen, sure, but as a nurse I was trained to run to the fire, I can not stand by and see innocent people destroyed.
Your right today men are much less amd more violent, so it’s a good thing to pack
Ok the ’70s, so between 44 and 53 years ago. Lots of societal decay since then even given the ten year range for the event you describe.
You gotta do what you’re heart and head tell you to do but you also gotta be willing to accept the potential consequences. One final point about this, you seem to be implying that your boyfriend had a duty to rescue you after telling you not to intervene way back in the ’70’s. You failed to heed his decision not to intervene. Doing so means you explicitly rejected his gender role of ‘protector’ b/c part of that role is to take control of dangerous situations while the female is supposed to defer to him in such a situation.
That’s part of the traditional masculinity and traditional femininity dynamic often rejected by feminism. The same feminists who then demand that ‘real men’ must do/should do x. That’s a richly ironic argument from feminists. We can’t return to traditional gender roles and have societal expectations of men to be ‘real men’ aka traditional masculinity unless we also have societal expectations of women to be ‘real women’ aka traditionally feminine. That doesn’t mean women in the kitchen barefoot, pregnant, uneducated and non voting but it does mean women should defer to their man in a tactical situation. It doesn’t seem too much to ask from women to refrain from implicitly signing up their man for a conflict that could lead to injury, death, hospital bills, legal fees, court imposed fines, prison, loss of employment.
Our law does not recognize a duty to intervene, and that principle is too important to sacrifice just to get some temporary satisfaction in a case like this. It is always lawful, although nothing to be proud of, to passively observe and mind ones own business.
I’m sure you would definitely never intervene
FFS, Milhouse pointed out the law. A personal attack because he did is a lunatic move.
He’s a condescending heartless person who apparently presents himself as a lawyer, but is not
I’m not a lunatic and I don’t pretend to be one
And, you know that hell? I’d be very interested to hear what you have to say.
Hell… How
Is he wrong?
Germany 1933? The “Law” is dying before our eyes. Eventually all will have to decide when that “line in the sand” means something. When there is no law, there is nothing. When the law is perverted, it is nothing. Dietrich Bonhoeffer proved this at the ultimate cost.
doubt a man like he was would refrain from doing his duty–trying and convicting these thugs for the crime of murder
I’ve been force fed that high-minded claptrap by you lawyers my entire life. Not only do you cheap shysters not have a monopoly on morality, you are totally bereft of it.
Milhouse is not a lawyer and has never pretended to be one. He’s just very well-versed, self-taught as were our Founders, but not a lawyer.
Thank you for the clarification. He is so steeped in the milieu his tone is indistinguishable from that of a licensed practitioner.
My question would be, would it be legal to administer lead therapy to those you perceive are literally killing someone?
Oh I think he pretends to be a lawyer on nearly every comment, clearly
That depends on whether your perception is reasonable. If you had a reasonable belief that the victim was at risk of death or serious injury, you would be justified in rescuing him, using as much force as necessary, but no more.
Sure, Fuzzy. Let’s pretend that Milhouse doesn’t pretend to be a lawyer. But he’s just like John Adams.
LOL, okay, actually lmao. Hee!
And here we have the ‘ex’ Democrat riding in to defend the lying, pompous Democrat.
As always.
Milhouse pontificates on legal matter with irrational aplomb, frequently spewing out idiocy.
Each time he is refuted he does one of two things –he shrieks ‘liar’ or some other such nonsense or he disappears from a while, only to resurface later vomiting out the same inaccuracies as fact.
And here comes Azathoth the demon, servant of the Prince of Lies, lying and slandering again. I am not a Democrat, I have never been a Democrat, I have nothing in common with Democrats, and calling me one is a vile slander. It makes you an evil person.
Did exactly as predicted–
Each time he is refuted he does one of two things –he shrieks ‘liar’ or some other such nonsense
and here he goes–
And here comes Azathoth the demon, servant of the Prince of Lies, lying and slandering again
Oh and for the record, my constant harping on Milhouse registered Democrat status come from an earlier post, when he said he was a registered Democrat. He said it was the only way to have a voice in a heavily Democratic area. Fuzzy admitted the same thing.
While it might be easier, registering as a Democrat allows you to vote for people who you think are better Democrats. It doesn’t fight the one party systems Democrats favor at all.
And there are no ‘better’ Democrats.
The law is not a matter of morality. The law does not attempt to regulate morality. It dispenses justice. Or tries to. Criminal trials hinge on a specific law having been broken. So, first there has to be a law. I learned this when I finally realized there was no law requiring the Secretary of State be competent, so Hillary was not criminally liable for Benghazi. I was very sad but I finally accepted it. So even the concept of justice depends on a law having been writeen and what it specifically says. Not the best system but probably the most fair. Morality is a whole other matter. And, guys, I’m not a lawyer either.
He goes beyond the law in the very sentence he defines it. He basically states that the principle underlying the law is too sacred to alter. His ilk quote the law as completely separate when it suits, and then engage in moral and ethical alchemy when it suits even better.
The principle underlying the law is sacred. The definition of freedom is the right not to do things you don’t want to do. The moment you are ordered to act, you are not a free person. And the only person with the right to sign away your freedom is yourself.
The left is very fond of saying that no right is absolute, and the common law right to not intervene should be no exception. We are all compelled to take actions we prefer not to. Several States do indeed have duty to rescue laws, and while they do not require Rambo-like intervention, they do require a minimum of notification and succor in keeping with the basic standards of human decency.
Additionally, there is no reason that it can’t be made illegal to film an atrocity for the propose of disseminating it for prurient interest.
The left loves total freedom when it is in aid of moral degeneracy and the decay of civilized standards of conduct. Not so much when it supports the foundations, developed over centuries, of harmonious and predictable living.
That law is certainly used as one judges wishes it be used
If your democrat it’s very convenient, not so any conservative
Of course the left would say that. The left don’t believe in rights in the first place. How can their saying it justify our violating people’s rights? Wouldn’t that make us leftists too?
You want to shoehorn it into the “obscenity exception” to the first amendment? That’s a dangerous path to tread. That whole “exception” rests on very shaky legs, and one day it will probably be repudiated, or just sink into desuetude like the “fighting words” exception that probably no longer exists although SCOTUS has yet to explicitly say so.
The left hates freedom. It will take advantage of it but its goal is to destroy it. See 1984.
You are correct in that our law does not recognize a duty to intervene, and I might agree that principle is too important to sacrifice. Not because of temporary satisfaction, but because each individual must make that risky choice. BUT, the culture is dramatically diminished when one does not intervene because THEY might be more prosecuted than the thug. Thugs rule subsequently.
True. But you can’t force someone to risk their own safety or life to help someone else. They might be totally unequal to the task. They could be the only support or care giver for a dependent. Or the situation might not be what it seems to be. There are any number of reasons an individual might not or should not intervene. We have police who are trained to handle violent situations, and we depend on them to know what to do. As for conceding the field to the thugs – that is what I think has happened with Antifa. Liberals have trained their own little groups of Brownshirts.
“We have police who are trained to handle violent situations, and we depend on them to know what to do.”
And yet they are only 30 minutes away and often never intervene,
Allowing the thugs to murder
BUT, the culture is dramatically diminished when one does not intervene because THEY might be more prosecuted than the thug. Thugs rule subsequently.
_____________________________________________________________________________
succinct and exact–thank you
There is a reason why I visit the “Active Self Protection” website first thing in the morning. It gets my head in the game and my situational awareness up to speed.
The people I worry about are those who have nothing to lose. And Portland seems to be manufacturing them on an assembly line.
The larger problem is that intervention applied imperfectly is punished very harshly and treated as evil by a large portion of our media. However, the original sin is getting an unjust and uneven lenience that is perverse and destructive to societal fabric.
They must be tried as accessories in some sort.
I know people are afraid they will literally be murdered if they intervene, and true that has happened, but taking film and posting?
A price must be paid
Families without fathers,
This is what we get, coddling children, no consequences for bad behavior
This is the way
There should be improvements to SYG law, with robust protection for interfering with assaults.
Problem is, laws are written by lawyers. If they were written in black and white terms, it would reduce the opportunity for massive legal fees.
That’s really the issue, no, I don’t believe they should be executed but something about filming the “event” and putting it on social
Media , maybe a slippery slope, but seems wrong on so many levels
We as a society are so screwed
Even I think that execution of bystanders goes too far, those teens are a different matter.
This is why local elections matter.
While my comment in the thread below:
https://legalinsurrection.com/2024/08/paying-for-damages-week-in-education/
referred to property damage, the same mechanisms are in play in the criminal justice system when life and death are involved, Especially for protected classes.
Subotai Bahadur
Occasionally, the Nature Channel will broadcast a program about primate research that often includes trail cam footage of chimpanzees rampaging through the forest to pursue an outcast member of their group, and once captured, the outcast is savagely beaten until dead; it’s carcass left for carrion-eaters.
I’m not sure why I am reminded about that…
It was my thought, some white guys , maybe gang, hunt them down , one by one
Maybe jail justice
If it was my brother or kid, you wouldn’t have to ask
Mike Benz: “Viktor Pinchuk was the single largest donor to the Clinton Global Foundation, is a major funder of the Atlantic Council, & kickstarted NATO’s internet censorship tentacle machinery after the 2016 election through his Transatlantic Commission on Election Integrity.”
____________________________
Chuck Ross: “Kellyanne Conway registers as a foreign agent of Ukraine and Viktor Pinchuk Foundation. She’s getting $50k a month to get US lawmakers to speak at the Yalta European Strategy next month, arrange meetings between Ukrainian soldiers and US political leaders.”
Kellyanne
Damn
Not to put too fine a point on it since we are stuck with Trump, and I am committed to voting for him, but his instincts SUCK when it comes to hiring people. He’s awful at it. Horrible. Terrible. Bad. And this time will be worse if he wins because fewer people will want to associate with him because of his record of turning on his (very bad choices slash) hires. Smaller pool of suckers means even more horrible choices. Sigh. We could have done so much better. But here we are. Go Trump!
That’s my fear as well. He was President for 4 years, and his appointments, other than for the Supreme Court, were a disaster for conservatives, Republicans, the USA, and his own Administration. Has he learned anything? I doubt it, but I hope so, and that is why I will still reluctantly vote for him.
We know YOU haven’t learned anything
ITS CALLED THE SWAMP
thats b/c many of us wouldnt want to be in a government job
so in many cases its swamp creatures in the bin to be chosen from for employment
You nailed it, Ms Slippers.
Still bleeding for Mr high heels I see
Sigh, no, we couldn’t do better, Trump is the one
I guess even taking a bullet for you isn’t enough
You’re having a really bad evening. I presume alcohol is involved, because your gratuitous insults make no sense. You clearly did notunderstand Fuzzy Slippers’ post. Sober up.
Still BLEATING about de Santis?
he gives people a chance
and then ,,UNLIKE LEFTY
fires them!!!!! when they dont perform
WHEREAS lefty doesnt fire them
but THEY QUIT when kamala etc is “too mean” and/or it was ACTUAL work expected of them
Trumps instincts are excellent
trump is the only way who just didnt talk the pro american talk but put it into action
demanding and getting those so called friends to start to send us the money THEY OWE US etc etc
like anyone else he messed up
the first step plan
the child care acts
the not arming the citizens at the border
trying to play by the rules and not be the dictator like obama biden etc
I hired some dudes when I was working in the Beltway, learning not to hire from the area. Hopefully Trumps now understands this and recruits from outside the Beltway and maybe recruits from the business sector.
This is always the way with you people–
Damn them while sighing your reluctance, then undermining and oozing out some general demoralization.
I don’t expect the right to unify like the left does–we’re too individualistic, but I’d really like to find a way to send all of you back to the leftist hell you’re trying to drag us all down to. because too many people can’t see you for what you are.
Worse than any overt leftist, you are that stumbling block that always manages to trip us up when we finally get the wherewithal to move.
There are two possible reasons for making a deal like this.
1. The DA didn’t think the case was solid enough to guaranty conviction. Maybe the video seemed unlikely to be admitted or the witnesses didn’t want to testify. So they offered the deal rather than risk the perps getting off scott free.
2. The DA was terrified of what would happen if he got a conviction of a bunch of black kids, or was otherwise politically disinclined to push for a well deserved harsh penalty.
Of the two options, the first one seems less likely. Given the nature of the case it seems quite unlikely but not impossible. The second one seems very likely. It is also completely reprehensible if true.
Agreed. Option two seems likely. IMO any scenario where one is outnumbered and results in death should be 2nd degree murder or attempted murder if serious injury but no death. Depending upon how long it goes on or if a pause occurs then it might become premeditated.
I suspect there’s plenty of ‘community’ activists to oppose that and enough lonely/biter cat ladies called to jury duty to wreck any shot at a conviction so the DA took what they could get. Bird in the hand.
The law of the jungle is back in style. The rot continues.
“terrified what would happen” will have to be a two way street
3. Black judge taking care of her cousins.
Bruhz.
The second one seems very likely. It is also completely reprehensible if true.
_____________________________________________________________________
if it is indeed the case, the da should resign–this was murder, not shoplifting and that young man died at the hands of the others–if option two is correct as you suggest, the da is more concerned with his own ass / career than fulfilling the job he was elected to perform–he should resign, be replaced or relieved
Henry Ruggs.
Horrible decision making on his part. Getting a ride when you’ve been drinking is a must. Killed someone, injured two others, killed a dog, sent himself to the hospital, out of the NFL and now to Prison.
We all know the federal civil rights division will sit this one out as well
Marxists are pushing race wars, and letting them off
Judge them with one, and let six carry them away.
These cretins need a good dose of FA/FO.
They have no clue what awaits.
Teaching black kids that they can get away with violent behavior, even killing, is doing them no favors. They may well come out of this as celebrities within the high school crowd at home. They are already stars, given the number of videos taken of the attack by onlookers. Their futures look very grim from my viewpoint. They’ll be in real prison before too long.
The vile Dhimmi-crats’ wretched, corrupt and evil racial attitudes and ethos posit that black criminal sociopaths and Muslim supremacists/terrorists are both allegedly victimized and aggrieved classes who can’t/shouldn’t be held responsible for their crimes and thus should be granted immunity from substantive punishment. And, yes, Muslims are not a race, but, for all intents and purposes, they are treated as such, by the Dhimmi-crat Party.
Just look at the ridiculous farce of the 9/11 terrrorists’ plea deal taking the death penalty off the table, and, the subsequent revocation of that plea deal.
This outcome in Las Vegas is sickening and indefensible, but, sadly unsurprising.
Just remember, the criminal “justice” system isn’t there to protect you. It’s there to protect against vigilante justice. The way it’s going people are going to resort to vigilante justice again.
This decision will encourage others to commit similar crimes. The DA needs to be help accountable. Does anyone actually think if the victim was the DA’s child such a decision would have been made? It is likely the perps will have the axe of vigilante justice hanging above their heads for a long time.
Crime is the new black entitlement.
It’s funny that many of the same people who think there is a duty to intervene when witnessing a crime, and that the law ought to allow prosecution of those who refrain without a good enough reason, also seem to hold the exact opposite view when the victim happens to be outside the USA’s borders. The Kitty Genovese school of foreign policy think that the USA should never intervene to rescue victims outside its own borders, even if it can easily do so. Not only that it has no duty to intervene, but that it has a positive duty not to. I don’t know how those two views can be reconciled.
Me, I’m consistent: Intervening to rescue someone is always optional; a person has a right to do so, but also a right not to. Intervening is often the right thing to do, but there’s no obligation to do it. Refraining from doing a right thing is not in itself a wrong.
It’s not the border, but the nature of the people imperiled beyond our borders. We generally favor American hostages held overseas being freed by military action.
You lefty fantasists cannot face the truth that is demonstrated daily by the terrorists whom you worship. That is, that we all care more about people in our own tribe-whether it be family, religion or country. It is good and natural that it be so. Let each take care of his own rather than worrying about the plight of those in Boola Boola Land.
That we care more about our own is one thing. But if we have an obligation to rescue those in danger, then how can it be affected by our likes or carings? If the victim has a claim on us, how can someone we care for have a greater claim than someone we don’t?
And what makes someone “our own”, and thus someone with a right to demand that we rescue them, just because they happen to live within the US borders rather than outside them? Maybe the people watching this attack and not interfering did not feel any kinship to the victim? Should they have? Why? What did they have in common with him, other than an accident of citizenship, which is nothing but a legal formality? So how can they be condemned for standing by, if that is the theory?
No. Kinship, however conceived, creates a greater desire to rescue a person, but it cannot create an obligation. A person, or a country, always has the right to rescue those in need, but never the obligation. The worst one can say of someone who refuses to rescue those in need, when he can do so with perfect safety, is that he is uncaring, that he has no sense of fellowship with the victim; something that he may or may not willingly admit to.
The worst one can say of someone who refuses to rescue those in need, when he can do so with perfect safety, is that he is uncaring, that he has no sense of fellowship with the victim; something that he may or may not willingly admit to.
———————————————————————————————-
actually that’s incorrect–the worst thing that could be said is the one failing to act, particularly when ” he can do so with perfect safety ” is a coward who abandons his fellow human to violence
America does not have a race problem, we do however have a problem race. FACT.
3 CincyJan in reply to gonzotx. | August 4, 2024 at 6:48 am
I don’t believe I’m having a bad night and I do believe I’m correct
Apparently you havent been paying attention
CommoChief in reply to CommoChief. | August 4, 2024 at 7:25 am
Oh you really assume a lot
I didn’t ask him to intervene, I intervened when I saw that no one was wiling to help the woman being battered, and I bet 100 people were standing there.
I just made a statement about wondering if he would have helped
Me if I got in trouble.
There were at least 50 men standing, looking, maybe enjoying the entertainment.
The fact she left with the abuser, well , that’s what abused women often do , isn’t it?
Not at all. I wrote that ‘you seem to be implying that your boyfriend had a duty to rescue you after telling not to intervene…’. That matches your description of the event.
Now you add ‘at least 50 men standing, looking’. You seem to imply that these men had a duty to intervene. Why do believe this while seemingly rejecting in fact directly rejecting your boyfriend’s tactical judgement?
If you want to re-impose traditional masculinity and traditional societal expectations of gender behavior/norms then you must also advocate for the same traditional societal expectations of gender behavior/norms and traditional femininity.
Feminists often use shaming, insulting language and/or attempt to use guilt in order to impose their misandry; phrases such as ‘a real man would do/say X’, ‘a real man wouldn’t do/say Y’. Very similar to d/prog race hustlers shouting ‘racism’, LGBT yelling ‘homophobic’, open borders activists yelling ‘xenophobic’, never Trump weirdos yelling ‘Russia, Russia, Russia. All these sorts of tired refrains have long since lost their sting.
The bottom line is if want a man to protect you in a dangerous situation then you need to defer to his judgment in that moment. Yell at him in the car or when you get home but….in that dangerous moment and its aftermath….either choose to accept his protection, part of which is accepting his tactical leadership and being willing to be subordinate to his tactical leadership …or refuse his protection and go on your own hook as MS strong, independent I don’t need no man sort of modern woman.
TLDR – traditional masculinity can’t exist in the absence of traditional femininity. When women choose to be modern v traditional they have zero claim to traditional masculinity including societal protection apart from LEO, Fire, EMS.
“Not at all. I wrote that ‘you seem to be implying that your boyfriend had a duty to rescue you after telling not to intervene…’. That matches your description of the event.”
No, that’s untrue, he told me AFTER that I could be harmed/killed
AFTER
And really, you sound like someone that wants to keep woman barefoot and pregnant.i said there were 50 men around because organically men Have always presumed to “protect” the family and society
I guess that’s why men were always drated and not women, we being the weaker sex
I put myself out there despite all the men who decided to let that man beat the shit out of that woman
I guess they thought it was Olympic boxing, they thought it was a spectator sport
I’ve also been raped and stabbed and despite the police finding the 12 inch butcher knife,and my injuries, they tried to make me drop the charges, again the 70’s. The Madonna or the whore
So , really, kiss my ass…
Now you say you claim your boyfriend cautioned you ‘after’ but this is a very late alteration to your storyline. You had multiple opportunities to clarify this point before now…but ok sure. The point remains that in not following the lead of your boyfriend you acted in a masculine not feminine manner. Again you gotta follow your own heart and head in making decisions but you should offer the same ability to others when they choose differently.
Societal expectations for gendered behavior require both genders to fulfil their side of the societal bargain. Traditionally men protect and provide while women nurture and educate. Men displayed masculine virtues and women displayed feminine virtues. Both were equally important to a functioning society. Unfortunately over the last 60 years those traditional societal expectations have become untenable in the face of unrelenting assault by feminist extremists.
We live in a free Nation. You are an adult and can make your decisions but seem unwilling to allow others the freedom to do so, nor do you seem willing to accept the consequences for them. You seem to desire to hold an on/off switch on when you want traditional masculinity. Men ain’t robots to switch on/off when convenient. We ain’t dogs to heel, sit, beg or attack at your command.
Personally I offer every woman I encounter basic courtesy and chivalry…. until she either declines it or proves herself unworthy of it. It seems to me the best course for men is treat every woman like a feminine Lady by behaving gentlemanly towards her until she proves herself to be merely a woman and not a feminine Lady.
I didn’t create any of the seemingly unresolved trauma you have. FWIW I was under 10 in the 1970s so kindly direct that anger elsewhere and not to me and I would suggest not towards men in general, especially those of us have never done a thing to you or even met you. Blaming men in general for the actions of your assailant seems very unproductive. I decline the offer to kiss your your ass.
“Now you say you claim your boyfriend cautioned you ‘after’ “but this is a very late alteration to your storyline. You had multiple opportunities to clarify this point before now…but ok sure”
I never stated he tried to stop me nor did anyone ask, when you made a wrongful assumption, I corrected you.
That’s all there was to it, period, end of story
You apparently have fantasies of how the event played out and are unhappy you are wrong.
Ok, gonzotx sure. Lets see if we have the events in order:
1. You see some drama
2. Everyone else was non pulsed about it
3. Nobody did jack squat
4. You intervened saving the day for …
5. The woman who you say then went home with the same dude she was in a scuffle with
Now five decades or so later you post this story insinuating everyone else was not only wrong but morally wrong. How else could your write yourself into the story as the Hero. In fact you are even more heroic than your Vietnam Vet w Bronze Star boyfriend who didn’t intervene and who you then imply may not have had the courage to rescue you if things went sideways when you intervened and old boy decided to add you to his ass kicking. That sum it up?
I urge you not to try that these days for your own safety. Especially in a large Metro, folks today got no issue treating women equally to men. Societal expectations that random strangers gonna come save you from a conflict you choose to create are long gone. No one has a duty to do so… apart from your male relatives. ‘Chivalry is dead and women (feminists) killed it.’ Dave Chappelle
Keep safe.
THEY have been teaching it in schools since the 1960s
when whites get together its racist/klan
when poc get together ..its brother/sisterhood
THEY ARE GOING TO FORCE PEOPLE TO FORM SQUADS TO STOP THEM
6% of the population creating more than 70%+ of alllll carnage
AND THIS IS THE MESSAGE LEFTY KEEPS SENDING OUT:
give them room to destroy
I think they are 13% of population
Our database of confirmed 2023 interracial homicides continues to grow and has just hit 1,400 confirmed cases.
Click here to see our new interactive database for 2024.
Full Tally: 1,400
Black-on-White: 579
Black-on-Latino: 206
Black-on-Central Asian: 19
Black-on-East Asian: 26
Black-on-Middle Eastern: 21
Black-on-Pacific Islander: 3
Black-on-American Indian: 4
Other Suspects: 70
White-on-Black: 99
White-on-Latino: 57
White-on-Central Asian: 5
White-on-Pacific Islander: 3
White-on-East Asian: 5
White-on-American Indian: 1
White-on-Middle Eastern: 1
https://national-conservative.com/2023-interracial-homicides/
you see what they are doing in the uk when the murderous thug who stabbed his way into the blmplo hall of fame
and how the gov goes after pro brits
vs
how they appease the anti brits when they beat the sh out of a police women and others
UNTIL THE WHOLE REAL VIDEO CAME OUT SHOWING WHAT THEY DID TO THE POLICE BEFORE THE POLICE STOMPED THEM
THIS EXACT CRIME IS WHAT THE USA HAS BECOME
a black on everyone else beating contest
WHEN THEY DESTROY ASIANS
they blamed trump
I’ve long wondered why vengeance is such a powerful human drive, as it seems to provide little or no evolutionary benefit. Nonetheless, were that my child I would find it very difficult to suppress that urge.
I wouldn’t, it would be game on
It’s apparently inbred. Fairness and justice are strongly related concepts, perhaps even identical.
And why was there a plea deal at all? Could they not prove murder?
Or was it simply a case of not wanting to face scrutiny over black criminals being prosecuted as equals under the law? Or, just not wanting to do the hard work of an actual prosecution?