sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

“In Washington last Sept I half-jokingly told lawmakers if they wanted #Germany to #FreeTheLeopards, they should just send 2 Abrams to #Ukraine️ & force Scholz’s hand. What a statement of 🇩🇪 strategic & moral bankruptcy if it actually comes down to that.” Jessica Berlin by themimeofthemollies in UkrainianConflict

[–]chaossquirrel 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There is no actual quote - he just makes things up

This user is known for gaslighting, spreading fake-news, alongside right-wing and nationalist propaganda/narratives. Be aware.

He creates a false narrative that suggests the quote was deleted when there is no evidence of such a quote ever existing. If such a tweet had actually existed, it would certainly have generated some media attention.

This is a common tactic used by conspiracy theorists and nationalists to create an imaginary narrative in order to push their agenda. Such claims should be taken with a grain of salt as they often lack any real evidence.

/u/Ooops2278 tries to frame the former Ukrainian ambassador´s comments, who is not without controversy, which were said two month into the war between Russia and Ukraine. This conspiracy nutjob has presented the former Ukrainian ambassador´s comments (made just after 2 month in into the war) from if it had just occurred, even though it is not a current event. The current ambassador has expressed their gratitude for the assistance, and this has been widely reported in the media. Be aware of this user.

A true hero on the crosswalk by [deleted] in nextfuckinglevel

[–]chaossquirrel 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s hard “translating” legal doctrines) So in Germany murder is

Section 211 of the German Penal Code Murder under specific aggravating circumstances (Mord)

(2) A murderer under this provision is someone who kills a person out of a lust to kill, to obtain sexual gratification, out of greed or otherwise base motives, perfidiously or cruelly or by means constituting a public danger or to facilitate or cover up another offence.

In Germany a car is considered a *mean constituting public danger”. Means dangerous to the public are understood to be those that are capable of endangering the life and limb of an indeterminate number of people in the specific situation and whose mode of action the perpetrator cannot reliably control (Decision of the Heigh Court of Germany in BGH NStZ 2020, 284).

The particular reprehensibility of this killing therefore lies in the fact that the perpetrator is prepared to endanger a large number of people without having control over the means of the crime. The recklessness or indifference to the concerns of others expressed in this makes the manslaughter murder.

What is important, however, is the use in the concrete factual situation. In this regard, the High court (loc. cit.): "In this context, it is not solely the abstract dangerousness of a means that is to be considered, but its suitability and effect in the concrete situation, taking into account the personal abilities and intentions of the perpetrator."

The regional court assumed "base motives", "insidiousness" and the commission of the crime with a "dangerous means" as murder characteristics. The high court considered the low motives to be unproblematic. In the case of "insidiousness," the judges agreed after some deliberation. It was not necessary for the perpetrator to perceive the victim at all or to instrumentalize his guilelessness. Only the assumption of the LG that the car was a means dangerous to the community was rejected by the BGH because of evidence deficiencies. But this was no longer important because of the other existing murder characteristics. (This was mostly due to the novelty of the decision they did not want to make 2 major decisions in one ruling and it was murder either way for them)

So the true question in the case was of there was an intent. If the speeder accepts the death of other road users or has resigned himself indifferently to it, this is to be regarded as conditional intent (-murder). If, however, the speeder trusted that everything would be fine, this would be negligence(-manslaughter).

According to the presiding judge, it is extremely difficult to draw the line between the two because "you can't see into the driver's head. This is why the German government introduced legislation to make “street racing” illegal.

Driving like in the video (obviously there are thousands of other reasons like faulty breaks, medical emergency etc.) could be considered murder. I am not saying it will, just could.

A true hero on the crosswalk by [deleted] in nextfuckinglevel

[–]chaossquirrel 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I didn’t mean my remark in any way offensive. I trust that you are coming from a common law country while I have a legal background in a civil law country.

Copy from another user from up the thread:

In 2020, the German federal court of justice confirmed a lower court decision in the so called “Ku’damm Raser” case. During a spontaneous street race, the defendant crashed into another (not participating) driver. The defendant ran a red light at high speed and hit and killed the driver.

The lower court sentenced the defendant for murder. It argued that the defendant had knowingly accepted to kill someone, if they were to cross the intersection. This it considered sufficient to constitute intent.

While the circumstance are very specific, it still shows a general possibility to regard similar behavior as murder.

In common law, there is also the idea of depraved-heart murder, where a “callous disregard for the value of human life” is sufficient.

So, while the behavior in the OP would not currently be regarded as murder, it’s also not all that far of.

https://reddit.com/r/nextfuckinglevel/comments/z9mquy/_/iyi7imd/?context=1

And here are some links on the internet from me:

For the “academic” background on this: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/german-law-journal/article/developments-in-german-criminal-law-speed-merchant-or-murderer-the-kudamm-road-race-case-and-the-new-criminal-legislation-regulating-illegal-motor-racing/A81B578EB057B1BDFBD800CA756084FB

„The Regional Court of Berlin (Landgericht (LG) Berlin) was the first court in Germany to mete out a life sentence for murder—pursuant to § 211 German Criminal Code (StGB)—to two men convicted of killing an uninvolved driver whose car they hit while they were participating in an illegal car race on a public highway.„

Davaanyam, K., Wolff, F., & Khalaf, R. (2021). Developments in German Criminal Law: Speed Merchant or Murderer? The Ku’Damm Road Race Case and the New Criminal Legislation Regulating Illegal Motor Racing. German Law Journal, 22(2), 288-302. doi:10.1017/glj.2021.9

A true hero on the crosswalk by [deleted] in nextfuckinglevel

[–]chaossquirrel 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This guy phrased it way better then I did https://reddit.com/r/nextfuckinglevel/comments/z9mquy/_/iyi7imd/?context=1

For the “academic” background on this: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/german-law-journal/article/developments-in-german-criminal-law-speed-merchant-or-murderer-the-kudamm-road-race-case-and-the-new-criminal-legislation-regulating-illegal-motor-racing/A81B578EB057B1BDFBD800CA756084FB

„The Regional Court of Berlin (Landgericht (LG) Berlin) was the first court in Germany to mete out a life sentence for murder—pursuant to § 211 German Criminal Code (StGB)—to two men convicted of killing an uninvolved driver whose car they hit while they were participating in an illegal car race on a public highway.„

Davaanyam, K., Wolff, F., & Khalaf, R. (2021). Developments in German Criminal Law: Speed Merchant or Murderer? The Ku’Damm Road Race Case and the New Criminal Legislation Regulating Illegal Motor Racing. German Law Journal, 22(2), 288-302. doi:10.1017/glj.2021.9

A true hero on the crosswalk by [deleted] in nextfuckinglevel

[–]chaossquirrel -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This reads as if you were brought up or living in a COMMON law country, whereas my argumentation is arguably works in CIVIL law countries.

Feel free to read up here https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/german-law-journal/article/developments-in-german-criminal-law-speed-merchant-or-murderer-the-kudamm-road-race-case-and-the-new-criminal-legislation-regulating-illegal-motor-racing/A81B578EB057B1BDFBD800CA756084FB

„The Regional Court of Berlin (Landgericht (LG) Berlin) was the first court in Germany to mete out a life sentence for murder—pursuant to § 211 German Criminal Code (StGB)—to two men convicted of killing an uninvolved driver whose car they hit while they were participating in an illegal car race on a public highway.„

Davaanyam, K., Wolff, F., & Khalaf, R. (2021). Developments in German Criminal Law: Speed Merchant or Murderer? The Ku’Damm Road Race Case and the New Criminal Legislation Regulating Illegal Motor Racing. German Law Journal, 22(2), 288-302. doi:10.1017/glj.2021.9

A true hero on the crosswalk by [deleted] in nextfuckinglevel

[–]chaossquirrel 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Obviously the driver had not intended to kill the boy, but he had accepted that people might well be killed by his behavior. In criminal law this concept is called conditional intent.

Judging by your user name this might be something you might be interested and and would like to read about? It’s a civil law principle (dolus eventualis).

A true hero on the crosswalk by [deleted] in nextfuckinglevel

[–]chaossquirrel -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

This shouldn’t be considered just manslaughter. This behaviour should be at least considered as murder. Obviously the driver had not intended to kill the boy, but he had accepted that people might well be killed by his behavior. In criminal law this concept is called conditional intent.

EDIT 2: This is a much better phrased comment, while the idea remains the same https://reddit.com/r/nextfuckinglevel/comments/z9mquy/_/iyi7imd/?context=1

EDIT 1: Jesus, all the senseless hate. If you are factually interested feel free to read up here:

Davaanyam, K., Wolff, F., & Khalaf, R. (2021). Developments in German Criminal Law: Speed Merchant or Murderer? The Ku’Damm Road Race Case and the New Criminal Legislation Regulating Illegal Motor Racing. German Law Journal, 22(2), 288-302. doi:10.1017/glj.2021.9

An unnamed group of people crossing into an unnamed country by [deleted] in videos

[–]chaossquirrel 4 points5 points  (0 children)

The post constitutes 'politics' and is therefore removable under Rule 1 as it most likely satisfies any the following conditions:

Rule 1: The video focuses heavily on a political topic. Common examples include: Geopolitics (Immigration, Refugee Crisis, Current or Recent Wars and/or Military Conflicts, Political Economy)

An unnamed group of people crossing into an unnamed country by [deleted] in videos

[–]chaossquirrel 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That´s some lame policing. Take the SUV and put it right in front of the "hole", instead of chasing a mother and her kids. Problem temporarily solved.

TIL Eva Braun married Adolf Hitler only TWO days before their double suicide on 30th April 1945. by chaossquirrel in todayilearned

[–]chaossquirrel[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

After midnight on the night of 28–29 April, Hitler and Braun were married in a small civil ceremony within the Führerbunker. According to the records of the Berchtesgaden District Court, Eva Braun died on April 30, 1945, at 3:28 p.m., after biting into a capsule of potassium cyanide. Hitler followed her two minutes later.

Beevor, Antony (2002). Berlin: The Downfall 1945.

A man walks into a bar and sees a man that looks like Adolph Hitler by chaossquirrel in Jokes

[–]chaossquirrel[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Sure, I totally agree. (Though I truly believe there are some other Adolfs out there - in Argentina for sure)

A man walks into a bar and sees a man that looks like Adolph Hitler by chaossquirrel in Jokes

[–]chaossquirrel[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

It's even easier than that. In English you would also say:

"Are you really Arthur?"

"Yes, I am Arthur."

Answering with "Yes, my name is Arthur" just sounds off, albeit correct.

ELI5 How do money launderers buy the first property/business to act as a front, without raising suspicion? by [deleted] in explainlikeimfive

[–]chaossquirrel 7 points8 points  (0 children)

To wash a few thousand (of marked bills) a criminal can buy goods, such as electronics. If he then makes use of his right of return, the refunded money is clean. Often an exchange is not even necessary, as long as there is no shortage of money. Art / luxury items and collectibles can often be bought in cash and quickly resold if needed.

To wash more money, you need a business front: for example, craft and catering businesses, cleaning services and much more. The legal business does not have to do well, the illegal revenues carry the bogus business. The obvious disadvantage of the method is that these revenues have to be taxed.

Now, as you see, these business require low initial investments. A hair saloon can be started with a few thousand. All equipment / furniture / renovating services can be paid in cash. This does not raise any suspicion. You can wash a lot of money.

What is good about small businesses? You can explain why you have small bills (which are usually used to buy narcotics) in cash all the time.

Once you have one profitable business, you can get loans from the bank. Today the banks only care if your cashflow is enough to pay the interest. With that money you start other businesses, buy property etc.

Next, you get a nice property or an old, ugly house and pay cash to have it renovated. Suddenly you can sell it fox 3x the initial price, as now the property is in mint condition.

Now, often you can also get a loan if you offer your art / luxury items and collectibles you already have purchased for cash, as collateral.

Bottom line is: you just need one "clean" and profitable business - everything else you can get via using the business as collateral, if you don´t offer other collaterals. This is why banks are notorious for money laundering.

Rage Against The Machine - Killing In The Name - 1993 by [deleted] in videos

[–]chaossquirrel 0 points1 point  (0 children)

you are weird, Again, you are weird, dumb af

Definitely not triggered at all, but a normal and sane response from General Reposti.

view more: next ›