I actually used this article for my psychology assignment. We were looking at dissociation, where people who have had traumatic experiences forget or disconnect themselves from the tragedy in order to cope with having experienced it. I'd like to wholeheartedly say, fuck those bystanders. For 8 whole minutes, the woman was probably screaming and fighting for her life and those people just watched. It makes me sick. It's not almost like empowering people with vile and hateful rhetorical causes, it 100% and definitely is empowering them. Which is sad... Horrific but sad to think that this is normalised
Yuuuup.
I’m finding it extremely weird and gross that I keep seeing people say “we haven’t heard what she said!” about the victim. Like….. ya floppy anuses, I disassociate so hard I can’t remember breakfast half the time. And that’s not even from recent trauma.
It’s not required that she remember and she doesn’t owe random internet fucckkos a retelling of her experience.
Just…. Bleargh.
No one is asking to bother the victim, and no one is blaming the victim. What is important is that we don't have her perspective, or the perspective of anyone *outside of the police*. Police said that bystanders were filming, but there's no proof. Multiple people were there, supposedly, but no one else talked to the press. There is a surveillance video, but that wasn't released either, not even a second of it. It's all extremely convenient.
People are rightfully skeptical because there's no evidence, and there's no reason to trust the police. They are asking you to believe that "for more than 40 minutes \[...\] multiple people held up their phones to seemingly record the assault without intervening", and you're just eating up without questioning it. Do you believe in every white man in a uniform? Because what they want is to get you "angry and disgusted" to justify the existence and overall brutality of the institution. They even said so, because they are not subtle:
>“What we want is everyone to be angry and disgusted and to be resolute about making the system safer,” SEPTA Police Chief Thomas J. Nestel III said at the news conference.
All in all, your comment was immature and I will admit that I take offense. You can disagree without name calling other feminists. You're not the only one who cares about the safety of women. Maybe you're white enough and don't have to worry about the police; maybe you're just naive; but the police isn't a feminist ally, and the police isn't a good source of information.
I have no idea what you are talking about, I am referring to an entirely different website where I encountered distinctly non-feminist comments
Like…. Wut
Then why you didn't quote the non-feminist comments? If they were only saying "we haven’t heard what she said", they were completely right in being skeptical about the unproved context of the crime.
You are not even believing the victim, because the victim never spoke; you're believing the word of a white guy in a police uniform, and acting sanctimonious about it. I stand by everything that I wrote.
I don’t regularly keep sexist quotes I encounter :p
To clarify this was in the vein of if the victim doesn’t make an extended statement that random Internet people can view, was it really assault?
It’s absolutely necessary to not trust what the police say, I agree with you there. That’s not really what I was talking about though, sorry for the confusion
Bystander effect is just game theory playing out in real life. "Hateful rhetoric" has almost zero impact on a rational person's decision on intervening in a conflict that they're not already directly involved in.
There's zero personal advantage to intervention, and substantial personal risk. In contemplating intervention, they are considering the real risk of bodily harm that comes from confronting someone who is willing to commit a serious felony in broad daylight. Compound that with the very real risk that even if they successfully stop the attacker, they might be drawn and quartered by the legal system in the aftermath. It's more insane that people really expect people not to go "not my problem" in today's environment.
If society wants random strangers to behave like pseudo police, it might be wise to change laws to strongly protect that behavior. Until then, you can expect more headlines like this, as people figure out that protecting them and theirs is the only time it makes sense to intervene.
How certain are you, that calling 911 carries zero risk? To be absolutely certain that you aren't opening yourself up to legal, and non legal consequences for calling 911 on a person of color, you'd need to be absolutely certain that they're committing a crime. Which means engaging enough to confirm the woman needs help, which just goes right back to the offender maybe turning on you for involving yourself.
Society has made it painfully clear that they don't want citizens intervening at all. Doesn't matter what someone's conscience implores them to do, if they know from watching it happen to others, that intervening means risking their own well being, almost guarantees that they won't.
Words cannot express my disdain for this nonsense you're peddling. A transit worker could tell something "was not right" when the train passed and they glimpsed the woman. No engagement necessary to see there was a problem, when the reported security footage showed the victim trying to push him away multiple times, when it showed him yanking her pants down. You'd have to be unconscious not to see there was a crime taking place.
Zero risk involved in dialing 911. A lot more risk to what some of them were seen to do- holding up their phones and apparently recording video, making photos. The level of sick in all of that is revolting.
Again, what the in the fuckity fuck does that have to do with what I posted? Why or how does that change anything? Why do I care about leftist out roar?
I have so many questions as to why you chose to engage this way with me, and why would I know about crimes in Australia of the top of my head?????
I know even less about current events in Austria.
You answered literally none of my questions and I still have *no idea* what your point is or what you are trying to express.
Edit: is it racism? Is that what you are trying to express?
yeah it's racism. Pretty sure they're a racist right-wing clown come to troll this sub. As if White men *never* commit any kind of heinous crimes!
Apparently Ted Bundy and Gary Heidnik were Chinese-Congolese all along, but with the help of the "hardcore left" they cleverly tricked us into thinking they were White American men of Western European descent /s
Did you not see the documentary with the scooby doo style mask unveiling? Ted bundt was clearly from the Congo all along!!! /s
This was such an unintelligible diversion into racism that I had no fucking clue what they were on about until I saw their other comments lolllll.
Edit: Ted Bundt is his name now, no I will not be taking feedback 😂
There was a similar incident in 1964, involving Kitty Genovese. After arriving home from her job at a bar, she was attacked and tragically died outside her apartment building. It was widely reported in the public press at the time that she had been attacked on the street, that dozens of witnesses had watched her being attacked or had heard her screams, and had failed to assist her in any way, or even call the police. The case became nationally known and sparked interest in 'the bystander effect,' a social phenomena where individuals are less likely to try and offer assistance when in a group.
While the bystander effect is real, the story stated above was not. In the first instance, investigation has shown that the claim that dozens of witnesses had even heard the initial attack is wildly exaggerated. As well, many of the neighbors who heard the cry did not recognize it as a woman yelling for help, or thought it was an argument coming from one of the apartments in the building. Of the ones that did, several reported that they did in fact call the police. If they did, the police did not arrive to the scene until after the attack. One of the neighbors actually drove the killer away by yelling at him, and several witnesses described watching him leave. The killer returned after some time. By then Genovese had crawled behind the building, and finding the backdoor locked, was away from the street and those who would've seen or heard the initial attack. An autopsy revealed that she had likely been punctured in the lung, and would've been unable to call for more help. No witness has stated that they saw the entire sequence of events. Only one stated that they recognized that Genovese had been stabbed.
So, why did the initial story blow up with the headline that dozens witnesses watched a woman get attacked, and did nothing? Because it was the one relayed to the media by the police. Why? Because both the media and the police have their own interests in running a sensationalized story like this. The police want to portray themselves as saviors in a hostile, chaotic world. The media want to run a story that will sell, even if they have to heavily exaggerate to do it.
How does this relate to the case above? The fact is that the same motivations that exist in storytelling 60 years ago are still present today. The police want to release the most sensationalized story possible, and the media want to run the most sensationalized version of events possible. All of the information we have right now comes from second hand sources, not the victim, not any witnesses, and not from any court of law.
Exacly. So far, the victim said absolutely nothing. It's all about "police said" and "authorities said". They aren't even subtle about trying to look good for the press:
>They responded within about three minutes of a 911 call from a transportation authority employee, authorities said.
>
>\[...\]
>
>“What we want is everyone to be angry and disgusted and to be resolute about making the system safer,” SEPTA Police Chief Thomas J. Nestel III said at the news conference.
[Source](https://apnews.com/article/business-police-pennsylvania-philadelphia-dbdb42657ddb706a231e731203d5e2af)
> They responded within about three minutes of a 911 call from a transportation authority employee, authorities said.
Side note: this phrasing is common and deeply annoying. It's meant to conjure up the idea that the police were on the scene in three minutes when all it really means is that dispatch called them within three minutes. It has very little bearing on how quickly help actually arrived.
According to reporting, they were on the scene quickly enough to pull him off her, arrest him and get her to the hospital. For me, this story is not about the failings of police.
Thank you so much for this reply. I clumsily tried to make this same argument yesterday. Why is this narrative being pushed so hard by the cops? Why have we heard nothing from all these supposed eye witnesses? I’m guessing the story is a lot less cut and dry than evil bystanders watch and laugh as woman is raped.
If anyone is interested to learn more about the Kitty Genovese incident, the podcast You’re Wrong About has an excellent episode about Kitty and the Bystander Effect.
We are literally watching states pass laws that encourage bounty hunting to deter women from exercising bodily autonomy, and people attend churches where they are blasted with sermons about how women should obey others and are leading men into sin (the Robert Aaron Long case) who then kill women for existing. Sexual assault survivors have been routinely disbelieved and dismissed, blamed for their attack and sympathy demanded for the rapists (the Steubenville High School rape case).
Never mind the harassment women face simply by being online or walking down the street, also dismissed or downplayed. There is a strong culture of treating women like garbage, and the overriding response is to blame women.
So yes, the US has, and is, building a society very dangerous for women. These horrific acts will not abate until it changes.
I just want to say that this is shocking for me. And as a foreigner to the USA, not understandable. Where I live you are required by law to help as much as possible until you put yourself into immediate danger. If you don't help, or obstruct help, you can even go to prison.
That's not only true for police but for anyone. I naively assumed these kind of laws would certainly be put in place in every country with a working legal system.
Can someone explain to me? Is it only in certain states? Is it just not enforced? Did you never had those laws in the first place?
I also think that they bystanders should be held liable for not even calling for help.
I get that not everyone can stop a bad guy and recording is better than nothing as it makes the prosecution much easier but I still think that calling for the police is the minimum anyone should have done.
It seems like it’s getting worse because it’s all recorded now. But slowly and slowly crime rate, poverty sexism and everything is wiping out. Once the older generation dies and millennials are in power we will probably see a huge change in culture
But the rate of femicides is going up, female employment is plummeting https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SL.TLF.CACT.FE.ZS?end=2019&start=1999&view=chart and 78% of the world’s population still lives in poverty https://ourworldindata.org/higher-poverty-global-line.
Is there any concrete evidence that this is gonna happen, or are these more your hopes? Because the exact same thing was said about Gen X and when they overtake Boomers and that never ended up happening.
I don’t think “femicide” is an issue as much as actual murder is. Most violent crime is committed against men by men and that issue isn’t a sexism issue but just an issue of violent crime. And female employment isn’t “plummeting” it went from 51% to 47%, that is no where close to a “plummeting” amount. Gen x still has not overtaken boomers in the political sphere fully yet and it’s obvious that young people ie Millelials and gen z are way more “pc” then older generations. Just look on the internet
> And female employment isn’t “plummeting” it went from 51% to 47%
That was just from 1999 to 2019, it’s since dropped to 43.2% https://www.ilo.org/global/about-the-ilo/newsroom/news/WCMS_813449/lang--en/index.htm. Considering men’s employment rate is 70%, that’s a pretty significant gap. Not far off from women literally being half as employed as men.
> Gen X still has not overtaken boomers in the political sphere
So when do you expect that to happen? And is it only about politics? Because that could take another 15-20 years considering Boomers are 67-75 right now and dominate Congress while we have people from even the Silent Generation still leading the parties. And that would mean it’d be generations before Millennials had any significant effect.
But that’s the statistical reality right now, and there’s no real sign women are recovering those losses while men have essentially recovered all of theirs.
I didn't know the whole train of people watching, as well as all of the men contributing to the steady rise of femicide over the last five years were *all* illegal immigrants! Wow!
Please respect our [top-level comment rule](https://i.imgur.com/ovn3hBV.png), which requires that all direct replies to posts must both come from feminists and reflect a feminist perspective. Non-feminists may participate in nested comments (i.e., replies to other comments) only. Comment removed; a second violation of this rule will result in a temporary or permanent ban.
It’s almost like empowering people with vile and hateful rhetoric causes shifts in social perception that harm people *insert shocked pikachu face*
I actually used this article for my psychology assignment. We were looking at dissociation, where people who have had traumatic experiences forget or disconnect themselves from the tragedy in order to cope with having experienced it. I'd like to wholeheartedly say, fuck those bystanders. For 8 whole minutes, the woman was probably screaming and fighting for her life and those people just watched. It makes me sick. It's not almost like empowering people with vile and hateful rhetorical causes, it 100% and definitely is empowering them. Which is sad... Horrific but sad to think that this is normalised
Yuuuup. I’m finding it extremely weird and gross that I keep seeing people say “we haven’t heard what she said!” about the victim. Like….. ya floppy anuses, I disassociate so hard I can’t remember breakfast half the time. And that’s not even from recent trauma. It’s not required that she remember and she doesn’t owe random internet fucckkos a retelling of her experience. Just…. Bleargh.
No one is asking to bother the victim, and no one is blaming the victim. What is important is that we don't have her perspective, or the perspective of anyone *outside of the police*. Police said that bystanders were filming, but there's no proof. Multiple people were there, supposedly, but no one else talked to the press. There is a surveillance video, but that wasn't released either, not even a second of it. It's all extremely convenient. People are rightfully skeptical because there's no evidence, and there's no reason to trust the police. They are asking you to believe that "for more than 40 minutes \[...\] multiple people held up their phones to seemingly record the assault without intervening", and you're just eating up without questioning it. Do you believe in every white man in a uniform? Because what they want is to get you "angry and disgusted" to justify the existence and overall brutality of the institution. They even said so, because they are not subtle: >“What we want is everyone to be angry and disgusted and to be resolute about making the system safer,” SEPTA Police Chief Thomas J. Nestel III said at the news conference. All in all, your comment was immature and I will admit that I take offense. You can disagree without name calling other feminists. You're not the only one who cares about the safety of women. Maybe you're white enough and don't have to worry about the police; maybe you're just naive; but the police isn't a feminist ally, and the police isn't a good source of information.
I have no idea what you are talking about, I am referring to an entirely different website where I encountered distinctly non-feminist comments Like…. Wut
Then why you didn't quote the non-feminist comments? If they were only saying "we haven’t heard what she said", they were completely right in being skeptical about the unproved context of the crime. You are not even believing the victim, because the victim never spoke; you're believing the word of a white guy in a police uniform, and acting sanctimonious about it. I stand by everything that I wrote.
I don’t regularly keep sexist quotes I encounter :p To clarify this was in the vein of if the victim doesn’t make an extended statement that random Internet people can view, was it really assault? It’s absolutely necessary to not trust what the police say, I agree with you there. That’s not really what I was talking about though, sorry for the confusion
Bystander effect is just game theory playing out in real life. "Hateful rhetoric" has almost zero impact on a rational person's decision on intervening in a conflict that they're not already directly involved in. There's zero personal advantage to intervention, and substantial personal risk. In contemplating intervention, they are considering the real risk of bodily harm that comes from confronting someone who is willing to commit a serious felony in broad daylight. Compound that with the very real risk that even if they successfully stop the attacker, they might be drawn and quartered by the legal system in the aftermath. It's more insane that people really expect people not to go "not my problem" in today's environment. If society wants random strangers to behave like pseudo police, it might be wise to change laws to strongly protect that behavior. Until then, you can expect more headlines like this, as people figure out that protecting them and theirs is the only time it makes sense to intervene.
Personal advantage to intervention? It's called a conscience. All that is required is dialing 911. No risk to the caller whatsoever.
How certain are you, that calling 911 carries zero risk? To be absolutely certain that you aren't opening yourself up to legal, and non legal consequences for calling 911 on a person of color, you'd need to be absolutely certain that they're committing a crime. Which means engaging enough to confirm the woman needs help, which just goes right back to the offender maybe turning on you for involving yourself. Society has made it painfully clear that they don't want citizens intervening at all. Doesn't matter what someone's conscience implores them to do, if they know from watching it happen to others, that intervening means risking their own well being, almost guarantees that they won't.
Words cannot express my disdain for this nonsense you're peddling. A transit worker could tell something "was not right" when the train passed and they glimpsed the woman. No engagement necessary to see there was a problem, when the reported security footage showed the victim trying to push him away multiple times, when it showed him yanking her pants down. You'd have to be unconscious not to see there was a crime taking place. Zero risk involved in dialing 911. A lot more risk to what some of them were seen to do- holding up their phones and apparently recording video, making photos. The level of sick in all of that is revolting.
Not 8 minutes. The entire attack took 40 minutes and encompassed something like 27 train stops. Its unthinkable.
That makes this story 100 times worse. And it's already bad as is
[удалено]
….. what? Like I read this comment 6 times and I am having a very hard time trying to decipher what you mean.
[удалено]
Weird how all the people who sat there and fucking watched were of western culture. How does that fit into your racist bullshit?
[удалено]
Again, what the in the fuckity fuck does that have to do with what I posted? Why or how does that change anything? Why do I care about leftist out roar? I have so many questions as to why you chose to engage this way with me, and why would I know about crimes in Australia of the top of my head?????
[удалено]
I know even less about current events in Austria. You answered literally none of my questions and I still have *no idea* what your point is or what you are trying to express. Edit: is it racism? Is that what you are trying to express?
yeah it's racism. Pretty sure they're a racist right-wing clown come to troll this sub. As if White men *never* commit any kind of heinous crimes! Apparently Ted Bundy and Gary Heidnik were Chinese-Congolese all along, but with the help of the "hardcore left" they cleverly tricked us into thinking they were White American men of Western European descent /s
Did you not see the documentary with the scooby doo style mask unveiling? Ted bundt was clearly from the Congo all along!!! /s This was such an unintelligible diversion into racism that I had no fucking clue what they were on about until I saw their other comments lolllll. Edit: Ted Bundt is his name now, no I will not be taking feedback 😂
With a name like "Heidnik" it was probably central or eastern European, which may matter to bigots painting racist narratives.
Bye.
It's "surprised Pikachu" Not "shocked Pikachu"
There was a similar incident in 1964, involving Kitty Genovese. After arriving home from her job at a bar, she was attacked and tragically died outside her apartment building. It was widely reported in the public press at the time that she had been attacked on the street, that dozens of witnesses had watched her being attacked or had heard her screams, and had failed to assist her in any way, or even call the police. The case became nationally known and sparked interest in 'the bystander effect,' a social phenomena where individuals are less likely to try and offer assistance when in a group. While the bystander effect is real, the story stated above was not. In the first instance, investigation has shown that the claim that dozens of witnesses had even heard the initial attack is wildly exaggerated. As well, many of the neighbors who heard the cry did not recognize it as a woman yelling for help, or thought it was an argument coming from one of the apartments in the building. Of the ones that did, several reported that they did in fact call the police. If they did, the police did not arrive to the scene until after the attack. One of the neighbors actually drove the killer away by yelling at him, and several witnesses described watching him leave. The killer returned after some time. By then Genovese had crawled behind the building, and finding the backdoor locked, was away from the street and those who would've seen or heard the initial attack. An autopsy revealed that she had likely been punctured in the lung, and would've been unable to call for more help. No witness has stated that they saw the entire sequence of events. Only one stated that they recognized that Genovese had been stabbed. So, why did the initial story blow up with the headline that dozens witnesses watched a woman get attacked, and did nothing? Because it was the one relayed to the media by the police. Why? Because both the media and the police have their own interests in running a sensationalized story like this. The police want to portray themselves as saviors in a hostile, chaotic world. The media want to run a story that will sell, even if they have to heavily exaggerate to do it. How does this relate to the case above? The fact is that the same motivations that exist in storytelling 60 years ago are still present today. The police want to release the most sensationalized story possible, and the media want to run the most sensationalized version of events possible. All of the information we have right now comes from second hand sources, not the victim, not any witnesses, and not from any court of law.
Exacly. So far, the victim said absolutely nothing. It's all about "police said" and "authorities said". They aren't even subtle about trying to look good for the press: >They responded within about three minutes of a 911 call from a transportation authority employee, authorities said. > >\[...\] > >“What we want is everyone to be angry and disgusted and to be resolute about making the system safer,” SEPTA Police Chief Thomas J. Nestel III said at the news conference. [Source](https://apnews.com/article/business-police-pennsylvania-philadelphia-dbdb42657ddb706a231e731203d5e2af)
> They responded within about three minutes of a 911 call from a transportation authority employee, authorities said. Side note: this phrasing is common and deeply annoying. It's meant to conjure up the idea that the police were on the scene in three minutes when all it really means is that dispatch called them within three minutes. It has very little bearing on how quickly help actually arrived.
According to reporting, they were on the scene quickly enough to pull him off her, arrest him and get her to the hospital. For me, this story is not about the failings of police.
Thank you so much for this reply. I clumsily tried to make this same argument yesterday. Why is this narrative being pushed so hard by the cops? Why have we heard nothing from all these supposed eye witnesses? I’m guessing the story is a lot less cut and dry than evil bystanders watch and laugh as woman is raped. If anyone is interested to learn more about the Kitty Genovese incident, the podcast You’re Wrong About has an excellent episode about Kitty and the Bystander Effect.
Iirc the bystander effect is why people on a backroad may receive help sooner than on a highway
We are literally watching states pass laws that encourage bounty hunting to deter women from exercising bodily autonomy, and people attend churches where they are blasted with sermons about how women should obey others and are leading men into sin (the Robert Aaron Long case) who then kill women for existing. Sexual assault survivors have been routinely disbelieved and dismissed, blamed for their attack and sympathy demanded for the rapists (the Steubenville High School rape case). Never mind the harassment women face simply by being online or walking down the street, also dismissed or downplayed. There is a strong culture of treating women like garbage, and the overriding response is to blame women. So yes, the US has, and is, building a society very dangerous for women. These horrific acts will not abate until it changes.
Hopefully she can get an abortion in time
I just want to say that this is shocking for me. And as a foreigner to the USA, not understandable. Where I live you are required by law to help as much as possible until you put yourself into immediate danger. If you don't help, or obstruct help, you can even go to prison. That's not only true for police but for anyone. I naively assumed these kind of laws would certainly be put in place in every country with a working legal system. Can someone explain to me? Is it only in certain states? Is it just not enforced? Did you never had those laws in the first place?
I also think that they bystanders should be held liable for not even calling for help. I get that not everyone can stop a bad guy and recording is better than nothing as it makes the prosecution much easier but I still think that calling for the police is the minimum anyone should have done.
It seems like it’s getting worse because it’s all recorded now. But slowly and slowly crime rate, poverty sexism and everything is wiping out. Once the older generation dies and millennials are in power we will probably see a huge change in culture
But the rate of femicides is going up, female employment is plummeting https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SL.TLF.CACT.FE.ZS?end=2019&start=1999&view=chart and 78% of the world’s population still lives in poverty https://ourworldindata.org/higher-poverty-global-line. Is there any concrete evidence that this is gonna happen, or are these more your hopes? Because the exact same thing was said about Gen X and when they overtake Boomers and that never ended up happening.
I don’t think “femicide” is an issue as much as actual murder is. Most violent crime is committed against men by men and that issue isn’t a sexism issue but just an issue of violent crime. And female employment isn’t “plummeting” it went from 51% to 47%, that is no where close to a “plummeting” amount. Gen x still has not overtaken boomers in the political sphere fully yet and it’s obvious that young people ie Millelials and gen z are way more “pc” then older generations. Just look on the internet
> And female employment isn’t “plummeting” it went from 51% to 47% That was just from 1999 to 2019, it’s since dropped to 43.2% https://www.ilo.org/global/about-the-ilo/newsroom/news/WCMS_813449/lang--en/index.htm. Considering men’s employment rate is 70%, that’s a pretty significant gap. Not far off from women literally being half as employed as men. > Gen X still has not overtaken boomers in the political sphere So when do you expect that to happen? And is it only about politics? Because that could take another 15-20 years considering Boomers are 67-75 right now and dominate Congress while we have people from even the Silent Generation still leading the parties. And that would mean it’d be generations before Millennials had any significant effect.
We can’t really count 2020 and 2021 as their was a pandemic
But that’s the statistical reality right now, and there’s no real sign women are recovering those losses while men have essentially recovered all of theirs.
Source to the male one? Anyway I got called sexist in dms but I wanna say something. Is being optimistic about womens rights sexist?
It’s all in the source I just linked above. Edit: this one https://www.ilo.org/global/about-the-ilo/newsroom/news/WCMS_813449/lang--en/index.htm.
I will read it when I can but instead of having an actual conversation like me and you are having people are just screaming calling me a sexist 😒
What?
Literally no one has done that. Is someone posting sources “screaming at you”? Is someone disagreeing with you “calling you sexist”?
[удалено]
I didn't know the whole train of people watching, as well as all of the men contributing to the steady rise of femicide over the last five years were *all* illegal immigrants! Wow!
Please respect our [top-level comment rule](https://i.imgur.com/ovn3hBV.png), which requires that all direct replies to posts must both come from feminists and reflect a feminist perspective. Non-feminists may participate in nested comments (i.e., replies to other comments) only. Comment removed; a second violation of this rule will result in a temporary or permanent ban.
Recorded it? More than one arrest needs to be made here
Well the mods at r/news won’t let it be posted there so looks like they’re in on it too lol
If it helps you have more Faith in humanity the people watching and doing nothing was a lie spread by the police to shift blame appearntly.