How do you put an end to situations like this...

I recall stumbling upon this YouTube video once—disturbing stuff—where some drunk driver ran over a kid right in front of a crowd of bystanders. They ended up dragging him from his car and beating him to death on the spot. It’s... unsettling. Honestly, with how many times I nearly get mowed down by distracted drivers on my daily commute—and thank God for my own situational awareness—I find myself constantly teetering on the edge of my nerves. There are moments when I feel like I'm just one bad interaction away from losing it and taking out every living thing in my path.☕

goldeneagle8 said:Alistar overrem and his brother once absolutely laid out five bouncers at some club... if you count the first two going down instantly, then it's basically 3 against 2, which isn't a huge deal, but man, 6 against 1 would be something else entirely...

There were rumors floating around back in the day that Preskar beat the hell out of some lone security guard outside a lounge, whether that's true or not... anyone who actually knows how to fight knows you'd need at least three years of training just to stand a chance...

It doesn't really have anything to do with the ring or combat sports. Physical and mental readiness matter in those situations, I guess, but you don't necessarily need to be a professional fighter to know how to defend yourself (though it helps). But anyway, like I said, I won't go further into it. It's not the subject here, and I don't want to get off topic.

First off, I have to admit I'm shocked that the guy is about 6'3" and nearly 265 lbs (according to what they said on TV), yet he couldn't even defend himself. He just stands there taking hits until he passes out. They say he was a timid, quiet person, but still, the lack of any basic survival instinct is... incredible.

Strength and size don't make you a good fighter, though they help. His height and weight don't really change the reality of the situation.

I was just listening to the radio this morning and honestly, I’m just sitting here floored by what I’m hearing...

The autopsy report claims that 17-year-old Miroslav Tunjić passed away from injuries sustained after a car plowed into him while he was already lying on the ground being beaten. Even so, the two attackers who were pummeling him have been taken into custody on attempted murder charges.

But here’s the kicker—the reporter actually says "but"!
It’s absolutely unbelievable to me. The entire tone of the legal reporting is basically, "Well, at least they didn't technically kill him; a car ran him over instead."
By that logic, if I tie someone to the tracks, I should only be charged with attempted murder because, hey, I didn't kill them—the train did!
It’s like saying, "Oh, it wasn't a person who killed him, it was just a bullet to the forehead." 👎

I read today that the autopsy results suggest he most likely died from head injuries sustained during the beating, even before being run over by the car.

I join everyone else in hoping those attackers rot in prison for as long as possible... but I know what comes next. They’ll start claiming one was just a kid, or the other has a sick mother to care for... they'll argue they have no prior record and have always been "good boys." It's the same old song and dance to try and get them away with the bare minimum 😠 after they took a life. 😢

It’d be pretty interesting to run a little thought experiment here: if a small group like this ran into someone dealing with some serious PTSD—someone with actual skin in the game—and that person decided to absolutely demolish them like a bunch of rabbits, how much of a sentence would they actually serve?
I’d bet both my kidneys and every single one of my teeth that they’d end up walking away with a much heavier sentence than anyone else involved in those Ritz incidents and beyond.
But honestly, we really ought to take a moment to consider what our legal system and this entire country are actually trying to signal to us with all of this.

silentpilot6 said:http://www.nytimes.com/news/crime-story-article-215167

To summarize... a young man was brutally beaten just because he had an mohawk haircut. They left him unconscious in the street, where he was then struck by a car. He passed away in the hospital 😢

And once again, there will be a thousand excuses made for the idiots who did this. Once again, the attackers will somehow be treated with more leniency than the victim...

What can even be done? 🤷
I realize everything starts with how a child is raised at home—the values parents instill from a young age—but there will always be sociopaths out there who shouldn't even be allowed near children, let alone harm them. So what options are left?
The education system, society as a whole... perhaps sanctions. Harsh and swift ones (though that might be a utopia...)
Regarding the killers of Coco Gauff, practically nothing happened. One individual received a single year in prison... a damn YEAR 😢 👎 for murder.
The others faced nothing... once again, the laws and the system seem to protect juvenile delinquents, and in this specific case, murderers.
What kind of message have we sent?
"Go ahead, beat people up in the streets; nothing will happen to you... even if you kill them." 😢

Implementing maximum legal penalties for violent crimes could help. If the killers of Coco Gauff had been sentenced to the harshest possible punishment, it might serve as a deterrent to others acting similarly. Perhaps then, idiots like those mentioned in the link above would actually stop to think whether beating someone up is worth spending 3, 5, 10, or 15 years behind bars.
Maybe they would hesitate... maybe they would walk away. Maybe they wouldn't be reading about it in the crime news today... regardless, another young life has been lost. 😢

I honestly don't get people like that.
I mean—I just don't understand what could possibly motivate you to for no reason at all go out and jump some guy just because he’s a punk or whatever—someone who is (I assume) just minding his own business while you and your crew go about yours? 🤷

Are you actually sane? Is everything okay with you? Are all the lights on upstairs?
Give me a break.
And besides—if you aren't sane at 15 or 20 when you're beating people half to death in the street, I guess you think you'll magically become a model citizen by 35 or 45? Some pillar of the community making huge contributions to society?
Sure. I'm sure.

Personally, I'd sentence them to 20 years at Gol Island—making them break rocks, so they might at least be useful that way.
The same goes for those who beat little Ritz.
They could all break rocks together while I give them a little pat on the head. Together 😁

I started a thread on this a few years back—I believe it was around the time the Ritz situation unfolded—simply because I wanted to understand the collective mindset of people who engage in this kind of behavior. To me, it isn't even a matter of criminology; it’s pure psychology. My personal take is that there is absolutely nothing going on behind their eyes when they act out, which is arguably the most significant issue here. It is a total blackout. They operate in a state where the concept of prison doesn't exist, nor does the reality that they might actually kill someone. I find myself wondering if even harsher prison sentences would make a difference; while I certainly advocate for them to rot behind bars, I suspect that wouldn't necessarily prevent this next wave of senseless nonsense.

Of course it wouldn't work, because nothing ever actually changes until someone ends up dead from a beating.
But look, if we reacted to every single act of violence with an immediate, concrete consequence—if those thugs actually knew from the jump that they weren't going to get away with it—I truly believe most people would think twice. Maybe not even the first time, but the second? Definitely.
The problem is, everything in this country is so wrapped up in bureaucracy and sensitivity that you can't even raise your voice at a kid without someone acting like a slap is a capital offense. You’ve got these parents who are so fiercely protective and ready to go full vigilante the moment anyone even looks at their precious little angel the wrong way...
It would be quite the sight to see footage of those same parents rolling into the local precinct in the middle of the night, somewhere around dawn, to pick up their offspring.
Even when those kids were wasted, high, or just being total degenerates, the police would suddenly find their backbone, acting all high and mighty about how much they protect children, scrambling to find some legal loophole just to file a lawsuit against them.
To me, it’s perfectly obvious why these kids think they can do whatever they want; they figure their only real authority is whoever happens to be the biggest, wildest bully in their circle.
And more often than not, it isn't just their primary authority, it's their *only* authority, simply because that person is the only one capable of doing something real if there's any disobedience or perceived "betrayal."

1. We need to hold people accountable when they fuel hatred. When they incite intolerance against anyone who isn't like them.

That includes figures like Vlatko Marković, Zdravko Mamić, and similar public personalities and institutions who basically signal—that hating certain groups is perfectly acceptable.

The same thing is happening right here on this forum. By using their militant moderation, the mods are essentially permitting, and therefore encouraging, hate speech. Hate speech isn't just dangerous because it sounds ugly—it’s dangerous because it leads to violence.

So, anyone who promotes hatred toward specific groups—whether they're public figures or just anonymous posters (women, Mexicans, gay people, Jews, Dalmatians, Herzegovinians—basically just anyone perceived as "different")has played a part in this killing.

So why even bother arguing about this?
Honestly, anyone who’s ever been born is basically an accomplice, just because a few idiots decided to beat someone up or kill them once upon a time.
I mean, sure, we can just blame the entire solar system since it contains Earth, and Earth is where all this nonsense goes down.
The sun deserves a good kicking!

hollowtrucker77 said:So why even bother arguing about this?
Honestly, anyone who’s ever been born is basically an accomplice, just because a few idiots decided to beat someone up or kill them once upon a time.
I mean, sure, we can just blame the entire solar system since it contains Earth, and Earth is where all this nonsense goes down.
The sun deserves a good kicking!

Can I get a troll card for hollowtrucker77? This post is clearly just meant to derail the thread.

It’s a stretch to think I’m the one getting singled out here, and honestly, you missed the point entirely,
are we all just supposed to be idiots because we actually follow the rules and respect our neighbors?
I suppose we could all just cave in, since the blame is pretty much spread evenly across the entire American social fabric, both inside and outside our little circles.

I’ll start by pointing toward the breakdown of parenting, the sheer incompetence of our institutions, and all those other systemic failures we love to lecture one another about.
What keeps me up at night isn't just the violence itself, but the silence of the bystanders. It’s those people who stand there with their arms crossed, watching a few thugs jump a single person without lifting a finger. Those passive observers—the ones who just watch and do nothing—are the ones I find most unsettling.

..Even a five-year-old should understand the basic sanctity of life, or realize that just because someone wears a hairstyle or clothes you don't care for, it doesn't give you any reason to interfere with them...

hollowtrucker77 said:Of course it wouldn't work, because nothing ever actually changes until someone ends up dead from a beating.
But look, if we reacted to every single act of violence with an immediate, concrete consequence—if those thugs actually knew from the jump that they weren't going to get away with it—I truly believe most people would think twice. Maybe not even the first time, but the second? Definitely.
The problem is, everything in this country is so wrapped up in bureaucracy and sensitivity that you can't even raise your voice at a kid without someone acting like a slap is a capital offense. You’ve got these parents who are so fiercely protective and ready to go full vigilante the moment anyone even looks at their precious little angel the wrong way...
It would be quite the sight to see footage of those same parents rolling into the local precinct in the middle of the night, somewhere around dawn, to pick up their offspring.
Even when those kids were wasted, high, or just being total degenerates, the police would suddenly find their backbone, acting all high and mighty about how much they protect children, scrambling to find some legal loophole just to file a lawsuit against them.
To me, it’s perfectly obvious why these kids think they can do whatever they want; they figure their only real authority is whoever happens to be the biggest, wildest bully in their circle.
And more often than not, it isn't just their primary authority, it's their *only* authority, simply because that person is the only one capable of doing something real if there's any disobedience or perceived "betrayal."

And you never hear anyone talking about what the kids actually owe society. It's always rights, never responsibilities...
I know exactly how those parents behave when they roll into the station to claim their golden children. They start screaming at the officers, who are too terrified of a formal complaint to even tell them to shut up.

legione, you're in the wrong subforum again. 😁
This thread is meant for legal talk. If we want to dig into why this attack happened or get inside the heads of these kids—who look like they're all adults to me—we should probably move this over to psychology.
We had a similar debate over on the legal board regarding the verdict for the Luke Ritz murder, and I think vojky made some pretty solid points there.
Since these two guys are adults, they can be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, so we could be looking at sentences much longer than just a year.
But what happens when we're talking about minors who aren't legally responsible?
From what I understand, the law assumes these kids aren't quite capable of making rational decisions yet. That’s why they hand out lighter sentences instead of basically ruining someone's life before they've even started. It's essentially a second chance, based on the idea that after some "rehabilitation" and a bit of maturing, they might actually reintegrate into society and realize they have to own their actions.
The problem is, how do you actually tell who was just manipulated by a bad crowd or certain circumstances, and who is just fundamentally broken?

silentpilot6 said:I read today that the autopsy results suggest he most likely died from head injuries sustained during the beating, even before being run over by the car.

I join everyone else in hoping those attackers rot in prison for as long as possible... but I know what comes next. They’ll start claiming one was just a kid, or the other has a sick mother to care for... they'll argue they have no prior record and have always been "good boys." It's the same old song and dance to try and get them away with the bare minimum 😠 after they took a life. 😢

shadowgull45 said:I was just listening to the radio this morning and honestly, I’m just sitting here floored by what I’m hearing...

The autopsy report claims that 17-year-old Miroslav Tunjić passed away from injuries sustained after a car plowed into him while he was already lying on the ground being beaten. Even so, the two attackers who were pummeling him have been taken into custody on attempted murder charges.

But here’s the kicker—the reporter actually says "but"!
It’s absolutely unbelievable to me. The entire tone of the legal reporting is basically, "Well, at least they didn't technically kill him; a car ran him over instead."
By that logic, if I tie someone to the tracks, I should only be charged with attempted murder because, hey, I didn't kill them—the train did!
It’s like saying, "Oh, it wasn't a person who killed him, it was just a bullet to the forehead." 👎

That kind of logic is uniquely American... and I am genuinely curious to see how they draft the indictment.

hollowtrucker77 said:It’s a stretch to think I’m the one getting singled out here, and honestly, you missed the point entirely,
are we all just supposed to be idiots because we actually follow the rules and respect our neighbors?
I suppose we could all just cave in, since the blame is pretty much spread evenly across the entire American social fabric, both inside and outside our little circles.

Of course you'll get flagged if the rules actually apply to you like they do to everyone else. This is going to be a real test of whether this moderator is independent and consistent, and ultimately, whether this forum even has any credibility left.

Besides, you're missing the bigger picture again.

We all share some level of responsibility here. Some more, some less. That’s why I called out those two recent hate-mongers specifically.

In America, spreading hate is almost encouraged. It's just the climate of the country right now. The more gullible people are, the easier it is to feed them propaganda. Attacking punks is just a substitute for attacking the LGBTQ+ community—it happens when there aren't enough targets in small, rural towns. It always has been.

Thomas Myers6 said:legione, you're in the wrong subforum again. 😁
This thread is meant for legal talk. If we want to dig into why this attack happened or get inside the heads of these kids—who look like they're all adults to me—we should probably move this over to psychology.
We had a similar debate over on the legal board regarding the verdict for the Luke Ritz murder, and I think vojky made some pretty solid points there.
Since these two guys are adults, they can be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, so we could be looking at sentences much longer than just a year.
But what happens when we're talking about minors who aren't legally responsible?
From what I understand, the law assumes these kids aren't quite capable of making rational decisions yet. That’s why they hand out lighter sentences instead of basically ruining someone's life before they've even started. It's essentially a second chance, based on the idea that after some "rehabilitation" and a bit of maturing, they might actually reintegrate into society and realize they have to own their actions.
The problem is, how do you actually tell who was just manipulated by a bad crowd or certain circumstances, and who is just fundamentally broken?

In the U.S., a minor over the age of 14 is held criminally responsible, though the penalties are reduced, and there are two distinct categories of juveniles subject to the justice system.

I'm just asking... how much depravity has to be going on in those heads before you can justify hitting someone over the head and tossing them into the street? You can't hide behind some excuse about being manipulated by peer pressure...

That isn't manipulation; that's just pure, cold-blooded recklessness.

Larry Brown10 said:I’ll start by pointing toward the breakdown of parenting, the sheer incompetence of our institutions, and all those other systemic failures we love to lecture one another about.
What keeps me up at night isn't just the violence itself, but the silence of the bystanders. It’s those people who stand there with their arms crossed, watching a few thugs jump a single person without lifting a finger. Those passive observers—the ones who just watch and do nothing—are the ones I find most unsettling.

..Even a five-year-old should understand the basic sanctity of life, or realize that just because someone wears a hairstyle or clothes you don't care for, it doesn't give you any reason to interfere with them...

The reason bystanders stay quiet is pretty simple: they realize that reacting won't actually achieve anything good—it'll just land them in a world of hurt.
On one hand, you've got the aggressors who face zero consequences, and on the other, you've got the risk of getting tangled up with the police or the legal system if you try to step in.
If the violent guys were actually being charged and prosecuted properly, maybe people would feel differently.
And if there was some kind of legal protection for someone stepping up to help, that might change things too.
But as it stands, nobody in their right mind wants to go looking for trouble only to end up completely screwed.

It’s hard to believe how things have shifted... lately, it feels like I can't even step out the door for a quick trip into town without carrying a sidearm for peace of mind. It's a sad state of affairs, but it's the reality we're living in now...😢