[Super Milk Chan]

Maybe just talk about it and debate it with some class mates with some hypotheticals. 

 Please do not use my situation as part of a thesis or anything involving your collage/education. 
 Even with made up names and some details changed, I don't want it to be talked about outside of this community in anyway.

Hey I understand the way you feel about this, but that kind of what students in the legal/medical/a lot of fields have to do, but it doesn't take a genuine to figure out that doing in a place like this will just be upsetting and insulting. That's what I am trying to explain to him. If people don't use real world examples then we would have Doctors. Doctors being a much better point of reference people can get behind then what he's going for.

[CrAcKbOnE]

No way this post real and/or serious. Anyone even see this dude before?
But yeah, I agree with everyone here, lets forget that man and the horrible take. Matt had a policy of not discussing situations like this or any people involved in forums or any public spaces. Idk what is Gabe doing.

[RussEfarmer]

The whole point of this post is if I was VolfVloss's defense attorney, I do not know what the hell I would argue, other than First Amendment in his defense for his right to espouse unpopular speech. His argument truly is unwinnable. It is something even the out-of-touch United States legal system would not reasonably argue.

I am really trying not to post much as im still "community banned". I respect the gesture, I don't think anyone wants to hear a what if senario of how you or anyone would defend him in court. 
I know I don't want to hear anything about him anymore. We know he would die before he hit the stand (now i feel the need to state for legal reasons this isn't a threat, its a metaphore for losing said case).

I have gathered that this may have been a fairly dumbfounding post in retrospect.  It certainly wasn't my objective to be the cause of any discomfort. This was just my own slightly pretentious way of saying that guys argument sucks. 

If you would like for me to delete this thread or find someone who can please let me know. I understand.

I get where you are coming from, but you gotta work on reading the room a little bit when you talk about stuff like that

[NO NAME]

Hey so as a law student I have access to a variety of useful legal research tools. 

After reading VolfVloss's post, it had me pondering on if there was any United States-based jurisprudence or legal precedent (primarily statutory and case law) that he could have used to somehow add even a minute tidbit of validation to his punishment of a minor for engaging in inappropriate acts with an adult. I know this might seem immediately like a moot point, but in especially our more archaic corners of the law, there can be some rather otherworldly reasoning in our courts. 

From my research, I could find no case law, statutes, or regulations that even hinted at the possibility that a minor is due punishment for the actions committed by an adult. I could not even find an eclectic law review article or treatise that even attempted to argue such a stance. 

The whole point of this post is if I was VolfVloss's defense attorney, I do not know what the hell I would argue, other than First Amendment in his defense for his right to espouse unpopular speech. His argument truly is unwinnable. It is something even the out-of-touch United States legal system would not reasonably argue.

This was absolutely not the time for a post like this. idk why you'd wanna even make post like this talking about voss's "defense attorney". I don't even have any words anymore like you cant make this shit up lol

[Aldig144]

Hey so as a law student I have access to a variety of useful legal research tools. 

After reading VolfVloss's post, it had me pondering on if there was any United States-based jurisprudence or legal precedent (primarily statutory and case law) that he could have used to somehow add even a minute tidbit of validation to his punishment of a minor for engaging in inappropriate acts with an adult. I know this might seem immediately like a moot point, but in especially our more archaic corners of the law, there can be some rather otherworldly reasoning in our courts. 

From my research, I could find no case law, statutes, or regulations that even hinted at the possibility that a minor is due punishment for the actions committed by an adult. I could not even find an eclectic law review article or treatise that even attempted to argue such a stance. 

The whole point of this post is if I was VolfVloss's defense attorney, I do not know what the hell I would argue, other than First Amendment in his defense for his right to espouse unpopular speech. His argument truly is unwinnable. It is something even the out-of-touch United States legal system would not reasonably argue.

This was absolutely not the time for a post like this. idk why you'd wanna even make post like this talking about voss's "defense attorney". I don't even have any words anymore like you cant make this shit up lol

I apologize for the poorly worded final two sentences. Folks seem to be hung up on the line, "if I was VolfVoss's defense attorney". What I was trying to emphasize here is that there is no real good defense as to why Voss came to the conclusion that he did. My hypothetical was meant to be rhetorical in nature. My intention with the post was not "ultimately this is what I would do if I was his defense attorney". In essence, it was intended to be a post in support of the community's collective decision to condemn his argument. Unfortunately, my post did not come off the way I had intended.

I had hoped that the knowledge that even in the wider legal community that Voss's argument was deficient would bring further validation to the community decision.

[RyanHighman]

Yall read way to far into this. The post can be summarized as "VolfVloss is dumb," which has been established. Basically Aldig is saying that if they were a public defense attorney, this would be one of those things where you would just look at the defendant and go "are you fucking kidding me?."

But also Volf wasnt banned for having a bad argument, he was banned for being disgusting.

Good luck with law school, though! You seem to have a passion for it.

Edit: Also, Aldig, the timing and wording of this thread are cold and in bad taste. Reducing the situation to a thought experiment isn't the move

[茶 Tea]

+1 i think we should make it legal precedent

[Here lies Eggroll's Eggrolls]

i don't think people are saw that this is in shitposting

---

[茶 Tea]

-1 didn't realize this is a shitpost. always disappointing to see a shitpost in this community. please be someone we can look up to.

[Super Milk Chan]

i don't think people are saw that this is in shitposting

---

It got moved to shit posting, the web staff do this sometimes to stop dumb points arguments.