Board index › General Discussion › News and Current Events

Another encouraged suicide in Boston

Page 3 of 4 [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

vermontsavant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,110
Location: Left WP forever

23 Nov 2019, 8:20 am

LoveNotHate wrote:
Bravo5150 wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
vermontsavant wrote:
I doubt the suicide hotline would encourage any type of suicide.

Sure there are many.

Like calling Dr. Jack Kevorkian, his doctor office would help people with assisted suicide.


Call 1-800-273-TALK then let me know if they recommend guns or pills.

In the US, there are 9 states that permit doctor assisted suicide.
https://euthanasia.procon.org/view.reso ... eID=000132

So, there's probably several hundred doctors that assist patients over the phone with assisted suicide.
I am sure that there are but that is the official "suicide hotline".


_________________
Forever gone
Sorry I ever joined


LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,195
Location: USA

23 Nov 2019, 8:22 am

vermontsavant wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
Bravo5150 wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
vermontsavant wrote:
I doubt the suicide hotline would encourage any type of suicide.

Sure there are many.

Like calling Dr. Jack Kevorkian, his doctor office would help people with assisted suicide.


Call 1-800-273-TALK then let me know if they recommend guns or pills.

In the US, there are 9 states that permit doctor assisted suicide.
https://euthanasia.procon.org/view.reso ... eID=000132

So, there's probably several hundred doctors that assist patients over the phone with assisted suicide.
I am sure that there are but that is the official "suicide hotline".

You seem bogged down in semantics and missing the point.

The point is whether -- providing encouragement of a suicide -- is free speech or not.

Can these euthanasia doctors provide suicide assistance (encouragement) in a book, over the phone, in any speech form?


_________________
After a failure, the easiest thing to do is to blame someone else.


Bravo5150
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Aug 2019
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,669

23 Nov 2019, 8:30 am

LoveNotHate wrote:
vermontsavant wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
Bravo5150 wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
vermontsavant wrote:
I doubt the suicide hotline would encourage any type of suicide.

Sure there are many.

Like calling Dr. Jack Kevorkian, his doctor office would help people with assisted suicide.


Call 1-800-273-TALK then let me know if they recommend guns or pills.

In the US, there are 9 states that permit doctor assisted suicide.
https://euthanasia.procon.org/view.reso ... eID=000132

So, there's probably several hundred doctors that assist patients over the phone with assisted suicide.
I am sure that there are but that is the official "suicide hotline".

You seem bogged down in semantics and missing the point.

The point is whether -- providing encouragement of a suicide -- is free speech or not.

Can these euthanasia doctors provide suicide assistance in a book, over the phone, in any speech form?


Even so, Dr Kevorkian and others like him aim their practice at assisting people who have certain chronic health conditions and have to look forward to things like a life of excruciating pain. I don't think they are allowed to help someone end it all who is depressed about a temporary situation causing them to be depressed.



LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,195
Location: USA

23 Nov 2019, 8:42 am

Bravo5150 wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
vermontsavant wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
Bravo5150 wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
vermontsavant wrote:
I doubt the suicide hotline would encourage any type of suicide.

Sure there are many.

Like calling Dr. Jack Kevorkian, his doctor office would help people with assisted suicide.


Call 1-800-273-TALK then let me know if they recommend guns or pills.

In the US, there are 9 states that permit doctor assisted suicide.
https://euthanasia.procon.org/view.reso ... eID=000132

So, there's probably several hundred doctors that assist patients over the phone with assisted suicide.
I am sure that there are but that is the official "suicide hotline".

You seem bogged down in semantics and missing the point.

The point is whether -- providing encouragement of a suicide -- is free speech or not.

Can these euthanasia doctors provide suicide assistance in a book, over the phone, in any speech form?


Even so, Dr Kevorkian and others like him aim their practice at assisting people who have certain chronic health conditions and have to look forward to things like a life of excruciating pain. I don't think they are allowed to help someone end it all who is depressed about a temporary situation causing them to be depressed.

Seems true.

This is why this is interesting, to see how they make this distinction, like you have pointed out.


_________________
After a failure, the easiest thing to do is to blame someone else.


vermontsavant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,110
Location: Left WP forever

23 Nov 2019, 8:47 am

LoveNotHate wrote:
vermontsavant wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
Bravo5150 wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
vermontsavant wrote:
I doubt the suicide hotline would encourage any type of suicide.

Sure there are many.

Like calling Dr. Jack Kevorkian, his doctor office would help people with assisted suicide.


Call 1-800-273-TALK then let me know if they recommend guns or pills.

In the US, there are 9 states that permit doctor assisted suicide.
https://euthanasia.procon.org/view.reso ... eID=000132

So, there's probably several hundred doctors that assist patients over the phone with assisted suicide.
I am sure that there are but that is the official "suicide hotline".

You seem bogged down in semantics and missing the point.

The point is whether -- providing encouragement of a suicide -- is free speech or not.

Can these euthanasia doctors provide suicide assistance (encouragement) in a book, over the phone, in any speech form?
The way the laws are looking now I would say the encouraging suicide or euthanasia is not free speech,however suicide and euthanasia are two different things so I am not quite sure where the law draws the line.

In the two well known Boston area cases the issue is suicide not euthanasia,so I am not sure euthanasia is even relevent to this thread.In the Michelle Carter case she clearly encouraged him to kill himself and Carter was no kind of doctor giving legit medical advice.

I don't know what the legalities are on encouraging euthanasia,the two Boston cases deal only with suicide with no known medical reason for euthanasia and the people who encouraged suicide were not doctors.


_________________
Forever gone
Sorry I ever joined


Bravo5150
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Aug 2019
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,669

23 Nov 2019, 8:52 am

LoveNotHate wrote:
Bravo5150 wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
vermontsavant wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
Bravo5150 wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
vermontsavant wrote:
I doubt the suicide hotline would encourage any type of suicide.

Sure there are many.

Like calling Dr. Jack Kevorkian, his doctor office would help people with assisted suicide.


Call 1-800-273-TALK then let me know if they recommend guns or pills.

In the US, there are 9 states that permit doctor assisted suicide.
https://euthanasia.procon.org/view.reso ... eID=000132

So, there's probably several hundred doctors that assist patients over the phone with assisted suicide.
I am sure that there are but that is the official "suicide hotline".

You seem bogged down in semantics and missing the point.

The point is whether -- providing encouragement of a suicide -- is free speech or not.

Can these euthanasia doctors provide suicide assistance in a book, over the phone, in any speech form?


Even so, Dr Kevorkian and others like him aim their practice at assisting people who have certain chronic health conditions and have to look forward to things like a life of excruciating pain. I don't think they are allowed to help someone end it all who is depressed about a temporary situation causing them to be depressed.

Seems true.

This is why this is interesting, to see how they make this distinction, like you have pointed out.


Would you call "practicing medicine without a license" a more appropriate charge than manslaughter for the victims girlfriend?



vermontsavant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,110
Location: Left WP forever

23 Nov 2019, 9:30 am

Would you call "practicing medicine without a license" a more appropriate charge than manslaughter for the victims girlfriend?[/quote]
No because they were not trying to practice medicine,they encouraged there partners to kill themselves for there own emotional reasons.The Michelle Carter case and the Inyoung You case were girlfriends who encouraged boyfriend's to kill themselves to satify there own purposes.


_________________
Forever gone
Sorry I ever joined


Bravo5150
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Aug 2019
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,669

23 Nov 2019, 9:35 am

vermontsavant wrote:
Would you call "practicing medicine without a license" a more appropriate charge than manslaughter for the victims girlfriend?
No because they were not trying to practice medicine,they encouraged there partners to kill themselves for there own emotional reasons.The Michelle Carter case and the Inyoung You case were girlfriends who encouraged boyfriend's to kill themselves to satify there own purposes.


I meant that as sarcasm. Love was trying to compare the girlfriend to doctor Kevorkian. Practicing medicine without a license would be the case if you call the actions of the girlfriend the same as a euthanasia doctor except for her lack of a medical license and leave out the emotional abuse element.



vermontsavant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,110
Location: Left WP forever

23 Nov 2019, 10:42 am

Bravo5150 wrote:
vermontsavant wrote:
Would you call "practicing medicine without a license" a more appropriate charge than manslaughter for the victims girlfriend?
No because they were not trying to practice medicine,they encouraged there partners to kill themselves for there own emotional reasons.The Michelle Carter case and the Inyoung You case were girlfriends who encouraged boyfriend's to kill themselves to satify there own purposes.


I meant that as sarcasm. Love was trying to compare the girlfriend to doctor Kevorkian. Practicing medicine without a license would be the case if you call the actions of the girlfriend the same as a euthanasia doctor except for her lack of a medical license and leave out the emotional abuse element.
Ok I understand.And the lack of a medical license is also irelevent because they were not even trying to practice medicine,one must try to practice medicine to be guilty of practicing medicine without a license.But I get it you were being sarcastic towards Love.Were both right I guess because euthanasia is not relevent to this post,the Inyoung You case or the Michelle Carter case a few years ago,there was no intent to act in a medical copacity.Go to masslive and watch the defense lawyers video,that sheds some light on the Inyoung's intentions.


_________________
Forever gone
Sorry I ever joined


vermontsavant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,110
Location: Left WP forever

23 Nov 2019, 12:41 pm

Prosecutor's have now said Inyoung You threatened self harm and suicide,and if she did it would have been all her boyfriends fault.She supposedly said to her now deceased boyfriend.This was supposedly to coerce her boyfriend to kill himself.

You can only access this article if you subscribe to the Boston Globe.


_________________
Forever gone
Sorry I ever joined


LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,195
Location: USA

23 Nov 2019, 1:18 pm

She plead NOT GUILTY.

So, it does appear she will fight this charge based on the 1st Amendment (free speech).


_________________
After a failure, the easiest thing to do is to blame someone else.


Bravo5150
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Aug 2019
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,669

23 Nov 2019, 2:48 pm

LoveNotHate wrote:
She plead NOT GUILTY.

So, it does appear she will fight this charge based on the 1st Amendment (free speech).


I think foreseeability would make more sense than first amendment. The first amendment has some limitations. If you don't believe me, ask one of the moderators on this forum. I am pretty sure that they would at the least call it harrassment if not something more serious if you try arguing that another member of the forum would make the world a better place if they killed themself.



vermontsavant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,110
Location: Left WP forever

23 Nov 2019, 3:10 pm

LoveNotHate wrote:
She plead NOT GUILTY.

So, it does appear she will fight this charge based on the 1st Amendment (free speech).
And how did that defense work out for Michelle Carter,not so good.The Mass DOC won't reveal Carter's prison for some reason,but on the bright side Michelle Carter should be released from her top secret prison in march, early for good behavior.

I do encourage you to watch the video of Inyoung You defense attorney on masslive it is very insightfull as to where there defense might be headed.I wish I knew how to post the link.


_________________
Forever gone
Sorry I ever joined


vermontsavant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,110
Location: Left WP forever

23 Nov 2019, 3:17 pm

Bravo5150 wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
She plead NOT GUILTY.

So, it does appear she will fight this charge based on the 1st Amendment (free speech).


I think foreseeability would make more sense than first amendment. The first amendment has some limitations. If you don't believe me, ask one of the moderators on this forum. I am pretty sure that they would at the least call it harrassment if not something more serious if you try arguing that another member of the forum would make the world a better place if they killed themself.
I think the defense attorney hinted more at diminished capacity and mental health from the video I watched this morning on masslive.com.
He described You as being very fragile and in a toxic relationship that consisted mostly of texting and phone contact.

1ST amendment defense did not work out well for Michelle Carter in 2016 cause Carter's been in an orange jump suit since then,keeping house for large Marge and big Birtha.It's going to be mental health from what I have read and seen and I have read and seen a lot because for me this case is local.


_________________
Forever gone
Sorry I ever joined


Bravo5150
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Aug 2019
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,669

23 Nov 2019, 3:26 pm

vermontsavant wrote:
Bravo5150 wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
She plead NOT GUILTY.

So, it does appear she will fight this charge based on the 1st Amendment (free speech).


I think foreseeability would make more sense than first amendment. The first amendment has some limitations. If you don't believe me, ask one of the moderators on this forum. I am pretty sure that they would at the least call it harrassment if not something more serious if you try arguing that another member of the forum would make the world a better place if they killed themself.
I think the defense attorney hinted more at diminished capacity and mental health from the video I watched this morning on masslive.com.
He described You as being very fragile and in a toxic relationship that consisted mostly of texting and phone contact.

1ST amendment defense did not work out well for Michelle Carter in 2016 cause Carter's been in an orange jump suit since then,keeping house for large Marge and big Birtha.It's going to be mental health from what I have read and seen and I have read and seen a lot because for me this case is local.


That is sort of in the realm of what I was thinking. There are many limitations on free speech. I would think the defense of not expecting to be taken seriously would make more sense than simply arguing a right to say absolutely anything. That is why I questioned getting the opinion of a moderator to explain how limitations apply for free speech atleast in the capacity of this forum.



vermontsavant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,110
Location: Left WP forever

23 Nov 2019, 4:12 pm

Bravo5150 wrote:
vermontsavant wrote:
Bravo5150 wrote:
LoveNotHate wrote:
She plead NOT GUILTY.

So, it does appear she will fight this charge based on the 1st Amendment (free speech).


I think foreseeability would make more sense than first amendment. The first amendment has some limitations. If you don't believe me, ask one of the moderators on this forum. I am pretty sure that they would at the least call it harrassment if not something more serious if you try arguing that another member of the forum would make the world a better place if they killed themself.
I think the defense attorney hinted more at diminished capacity and mental health from the video I watched this morning on masslive.com.
He described You as being very fragile and in a toxic relationship that consisted mostly of texting and phone contact.

1ST amendment defense did not work out well for Michelle Carter in 2016 cause Carter's been in an orange jump suit since then,keeping house for large Marge and big Birtha.It's going to be mental health from what I have read and seen and I have read and seen a lot because for me this case is local.


That is sort of in the realm of what I was thinking. There are many limitations on free speech. I would think the defense of not expecting to be taken seriously would make more sense than simply arguing a right to say absolutely anything. That is why I questioned getting the opinion of a moderator to explain how limitations apply for free speech atleast in the capacity of this forum.
I wouldn't worry to much about moderator's here,Google the Michelle Carter case from three years ago.Watch the video of Inyoung You's defense attorney on MassLive.That will tell you what you need to know about where this case is headed.


_________________
Forever gone
Sorry I ever joined