What he did wasn't "kidnapping" ... until he started driving away. Then it 100% was.
However? While what he did was HIGHLY "sus" it wasn't a crime. Giving a kid a ride home, grabbing a snack? Because they're (I presume) the same "community" that's not unheard of. Maybe it looked like rain? BUT if the kid wasn't also a jeet? That's highly suspicious. Plus the "leave your gear here" is a huge red flag.
So the act of talking to the kid, giving the kid a ride & even getting a treat aren't criminal. The gear is huge & the driving away IS a crime.
18 months is a HUGE sentence in Canada, slaps on the wrist for non-Whites is SO commonplace.
You are correct. Just talking to kids in public isn't a crime. Whet this guy did after that should be though!
It's a big difference: "Hey lil dude! Catch anything? Nice day eh? Good luck!"
vs:
"Leave your gear behind & come get ice cream with me, I'll drive you home for reals!"
Boku no Pico starts with a car ride to get ice cream, ...or so I've been told!
It was 120 to 150 meters, several hundred (4-500) feet.
Not a difficult shot says people who do such things.
Yes, the situation leading up to the shooting is more than a little bit "suspect" eh? And the man who was obviously helping him scout the area days earlier? With the white van? No mention of any effort to find him. When they say "the shooter acted alone" they're not telling the whole truth.
The "problem" is not that they die quickly or slowly, the problem is that a live-birthed child is legally allowed to be killed. That doctors & nurses are absolved from their normal duty to provide life-saving care for them. Of course they're there to kill it in the first place, but to make it legal to kill babies after they're born is... troublesome.
Not for you though, obviously.
As for science (the other reply) there is a faith element to it, as pointed out by RA Wilson & Einstein too. Did the scientist fake their results? Were results accurately recorded? Was data manipulated, poorly collected or otherwise unreliable? Were the papers peer-reviewed or "pal reviewed"? Is the research repeatable?
One doesn't DO the experiment to see if it's accurate, one depends on the word of others, yes? Not much would get done if every scientist using a theory had to reproduce the experiment / research to verify it is accurate. They believe the word of others. That's an act of faith. See: 2b2 and 3. Faith is not limited to religion alone, ok?
Kamala would have continued Biden's & Obama's policies of blocking ANY power that's not "renewable". And also that is Nuclear, they'd never allow those either.
So the 9GB would have to come from W&S, lolz. That would kill it dead.
Um, yeah. That's kind of my point, eh?
W&S simply don't work. They require 100% backup OR rolling or even total blackouts that could last for days. Alarmists never seem to grasp this concept.
The greenies seem to think that 9GB of W&S needs 9GB of battery backup. Nope! To run for 2 days off batteries requires 9x48GB of backup battery capacity. 96GB capacity, at 4X the cost per GB of the W&S it backs up. IF the technology existed to do the job, it doesn't. Alarmists are stupid.
Or 9GB of Gas or Nuclear... but if you're building 9GB of gas, why build W&S (at twice the cost) at all? 🤔 Hydro is out, there are NO more large hydro projects left that could be viable.
Quite possible, but at least 2 other massive centers are in planning, backed by huge money. Lots of "smaller" ones needing only 2-3 GB of power are also planned. "only"
I have NO idea how these monstrosities will pay for themselves, or even what goals they hope to accomplish. I'm just pointing out the massive power demands they have & that they are NOT using Wind & Solar, eh?
No, in fact, a normal baby WILL die rather quickly after birth if not cared for. Starvation or hypothermia are swift killers for tiny infants. It will "go to sleep" and never wake up, eh?
So your foundation is that YOU (or any authority) get to decide who is a person or not. Based on arbitrary "rules" that can change like the wind. That's not science. Based on DNA is science.
"Value" is the ultimate arbitrary measure! Utterly unscientific. Just FYI. Just like "beauty" or "usefulness" or "scary" & etc.
Simple: there are things we humans do not understand. There's things we know we don't and things we don't know we don't. There's things we think we understand, but in fact are incorrect. & etc.
Spooky Action At A Distance aka: Einstein's Clock in the Box mind experiment. They actually carried this out, it's there, the impossible was proven to be real.
One of those things we don't know is what makes us human. Sentience? Salience? Sapience? Not commonly found in nature, especially all 3! But we humans have them & other fancy words too.
If souls exist? Then there is an afterlife & more things we currently don't understand. If they don't exist? It's highly likely we simply cease to exist when we die. Believing that souls set us apart from (most) animals has no cost. If we're right we win, and if we're wrong we won't care because we'll cease to exist. Simple really.
Abiogenesis & the origin of the universe. God created it, on purpose. Maybe He created the Big Bang? Why not? For what reason? We don't know, we can only guess. (Yes, I'm a Deist, eh?) BUT the odds against intelligent life, or almost any life, to "accidentally exist" after only 13.4 Billion years is astronomical. Add to that: where did the BB come from?
So: Believing in God and Souls (and Evolution too, of course) is just as scientific as the current scientific theories. No religion required. All science is based on faith too, eh?
Primarily, says me. I decide.
Oh, thanks for the answer. I am free to utterly ignore anything you decide, asw is the rest of the world. Cool.
The junkie is not a person, because he has acted like a junkie for his whole life.
So when he was 9? He was not a person? At 11, 15? how about 22 the year before the junk hit, was he a non-person then too? You do see how arbitrary and therefor irrelevant your "rules" are, right?
I am the KING of not confusing the map with the terrain. It's one of my favorite things to tell to idiotic leftists. "Prerequisite"? Humans are persons and persons are humans. It's an interchangeable word. You cannot claim a human is a non-human, and you cannot arbitrarily decide who is a person or not. I mean you as an individual can, but that's also the number of people who would base their ideology on your ideas: 1.
If governments gain the power to decide who is and is not a "person" that's when the cattle-cars start filling up, ok? Killing Fields, Holodomor, Great Leap Foreword & etc.
So they're going to build a bunch of Gas power stations JUST for the data center. Shark Tank investor Kevin O'Leary's company.
Why don't they build Wind & Solar? It's cheaper & perfect in every way! (/end sarc)
But really, they should build Nuclear power for it.
You said killing a fetus is OK because it isn't a person. Therefore killing humans IS ok, because fetus are humans.
So who decides if a human is a "person" or not? The government? If the junkie on the street cleans up & writes several popular novels, is he suddenly a person? Says who? The overlap between beings with human DNA and persons is 100%. 100% of humans are persons & vice versa.
Now I'd allow that there's "persons" who aren't actually humans, they just look like humans. Based on them not having a soul. That that's an entirely different can of fish, eh? Then we get into the problem of animals having souls (they do!) & so forth.
Having human DNA makes you, you know, human. A chimp has "similar" DNA but it isn't 100% the same & therefor a chimp is not a human. Or a person either.
DNA is the only thing that scientifically measures if you are a human or not. An opera singer or a person in a coma are both humans even if one of them can't move or speak. They both have human DNA. Different of course, but within the boundaries of what a human has.
This mindset?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kermit_Gosnell
As I said. Performing an abortion, the baby pops out still alive. You are allowed, in some Democrat states, to kill it even after birth. If it can cry it is fully developed, ok? "Mortal wound"? You DO know what babies do, yes? They cry.
You don't know who Dolly Parton is? She wrote most of her huge number of tits. I mean Hits! 😆 Huge hits!
Don't know Stevie Wonder? Wait is he still alive? Carol King may be less well known, but lots of acts covered her songs with better success/fame.
PK Dick wrote a short story about just that: the future society where you are only considered "human" if you can do some simple calculus. Before that? You can be "recycled" at the whim of your mother (NOT the father!), usually around age 8 or 9. He got more hate mail, back in the 60's! for that one than all the rest combined. Actual mail, eh? Someone paid money to tell him that they hate him.
Daemon Knight had a similar story. Until you turn 16? Your parents can send you "to the adoption agency" which sounds great, eh? Except the 'agency' just keeps you for 6 months, then harvests your organs. The chance of actual adoption is close to zero.
So kids in that story are amazing. They get up in the morning, cook & clean, pay close attention in school, never get in trouble!
The story is about such a boy, 14 and his parents decide to go on vacation on another planet. It's too bothersome to take him along, or even ask relatives to care for him, so they order him to go to the "adoption center". Dark!
You mention DNA. Did you know that after (iirc) 5th cell division the developing fetus (or whatever it is called at that point) no longer 'borrows' DNA from the mother? It has its own, unique DNA.
How do you define who is human and what is not? By DNA of course.
BTW "full term abortions" are very real. 9 months along, they "crown" the fetus, carve its skull open & scoop out the brains. Then cut it up to extract. Hundreds, if not thousands every year.
Several Blue States have laws allowing doctors & nurses to refuse treatment of a fetus if it gets delivered accidentally during the abortion. It lays on the floor until it stops crying. That's not as common but if it never happens? Why pass laws allowing this?
It is relevant if there's some ambiguity. When he started driving away? THAT left no ambiguity at all: straight-up kidnapping.
But before that he was highly "sus" but not criminal.
Without the drive-off, would I let this guy within 10 meters of any kid? Hell no! What a creep. Boku no Pico Material eh?